Michael - The Great Album Debate

[larry141094]

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

Here endeth the lesson.

If your so confident your opinion is correct, then you should be able to put it through multiple tests to prove that it is correct to those of us who don't know it

 

[fzsky]

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

You can not be reasoned with, you completely missed the point once again, Eyes capture light which is then interpreted by the brain, using that stimuli a person can identify an object or a building, yet hearing is not so precise, we can hear the sound of a budgie, and identify it as a budgie, but if we were blindfolded and heard three different budgies, even figuring out that they were different budgies, would be near impossible

That's because we are human and our ears are not designed to distinguish the voice of budgies. If we are budgies, we will be able to.

 

[larry141094]

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

You are right, Gugu, but where to start? We've been discussing this for months now, leading no way. I fear it will only continue, and I fear Sony will try to make us forget. Lots of fans have already moved on. Maybe that's what they want us to do? Move on?

Because, where the hell is the proof The Cascio have? WHERE?


Why are you making things so complicated?

I was wondering if sam couldn't understand simple things yet understood complex things

 

[love is magical]

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

I have 3 factors that i put into my reasoning (by the way i originally thought the tracks were fake and later changed my mind upon thinking about it)

1. Common Sense (It's a Michael Jackson album).

How do you explain Milli Vanilli?

2. No one would benefit from the transaction (As Sony would not have spent money on something that was fake, i assume they had it analysed first so that they had insurance that their money wasn't being wasted).

Why do you think Sony wouldn't benefit from putting the Cascio tracks on the album? This is exactly the reason such low quality questionable tracks are on the ablum - to make a profit. Instead of including 10 genuine Michael Jackson songs, Sony put three sub-par songs on this album and save three genuine songs for future release. It works for Sony. The album is doing well for a posthumous release. The questionable tracks open the door for more questionable tracks to be released in the future. Songs with partial Michael Jackson vocals out-number songs with complete Michael Jackson vocals. Putting the Cascio tracks on the ablum seems to be an investment that pays off.

3. Accepting that there was no proof otherwise and having gone down a list of Socratic possibilities came to the conclusion i am at.

Could you offer us any substantial proof that back up your conclusion?

 

[larry141094]

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

That's because we are human and our ears are not designed to distinguish the voice of budgies. If we are budgies, we will be able to.

The point is, if you heard 3 people with similar voices and then was blind folded and told to identify the voices, you most of the time, would be wrong, and would rely on guess work

 

[samhabib]

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

Why are you making things so complicated?

Deliberate effort to take the attention away from the actual songs. Listen to the songs. Everything you want to know is in them. "Why did you fake it? Why did you fake it?"

 

[samhabib]

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

I was wondering if sam couldn't understand simple things yet understood complex things

Don't even think about trying to patronise me. Anyone who believes Michael Jackson is on those bogus songs deserves to be lied to.

 

[fzsky]

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

The point is, if you heard 3 people with similar voices and then was blind folded and told to identify the voices, you most of the time, would be wrong, and would rely on guess work

True. But it's much easier to tell the difference between different voices.
Or are you saying that it's almost impossible the tell the difference?

 

[larry141094]

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

How do you explain Milli Vanilli?



Why do you think Sony wouldn't benefit from putting the Cascio tracks on the album? This is exactly the reason such low quality questionable tracks are on the ablum - to make a profit. Instead of including 10 genuine Michael Jackson songs, Sony put three sub-par songs on this album and save three genuine songs for future release. It works for Sony. The album is doing well for a posthumous release. The questionable tracks open the door for more questionable tracks to be released in the future. Songs with partial Michael Jackson vocals out-number songs with complete Michael Jackson vocals. Putting the Cascio tracks on the ablum seems to be an investment that pays off.



Could you offer us any substantial proof that back up your conclusion?

The cascio tracks were put onto the album, as they were best suited for it, the other cascio tracks did not make it onto the album, the point is, we are not looking for proof, as we have none, we are looking for an opinion that cannot be proven wrong no matter what you throw at it.

My reasoning for believing that Sony put the Cascio tracks on the album was a simple business reason, they wouldn't spend money on something until they knew what they were getting, they would have had the testing done on the tracks before they bought them, in order to make sure that what they were paying for was what they got.

 

[Pentum]

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

Deliberate effort to take the attention away from the actual songs. Listen to the songs. Everything you want to know is in them. "Why did you fake it? Why did you fake it?"

Exactly.

larry, thoughts on this? Are you going to tell me this is just two similar voices? I have never, ever heard anyone even do this kind of "falsetto". But I guess it's a coincidence that an MJ sound alike, Jason Malachi did it at the same time Michael for the first and only time did it?

(listen in 480p)
[youtube]ffjawSAF-EY[/youtube]

they wouldn't spend money on something until they knew what they were getting, they would have had the testing done on the tracks before they bought them, in order to make sure that what they were paying for was what they got.

You don't know this FYI. They might have heard the songs, without having any kinds of thoughts about it being another artist.

Again, we don't know anything. Sony might as have been knowing all along. Yes, I believe they are kind of "evil" and capable of doing such.

 

[samhabib]

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

True. But it's much easier to tell the difference between different voices.
Or are you saying that it's almost impossible the tell the difference?

I don't know why you're even engaging him in such a ridiculous thought. He's basically saying 'if I blindfold you and then ask you to pick out members of your family from their voices, you wouldn't be able to do it'. Yes. You would be able to. And that's how close Michael's voice is to most of us. It's a preposterous analogy. From someone desperately trying to deflect attention from the actual bogus nature of the vocals.

 

[Tony R]

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

If your so confident your opinion is correct, then you should be able to put it through multiple tests to prove that it is correct to those of us who don't know it

Because I don't give a damn what others believe. They may well be right (but I doubt it). I know what I believe and that's all that matters to me (I gave the same argument during Mike's molestation case).

I don't come in here to chnage people's opinions, I come to give mine and also for the banter with like minded folks.

 

[larry141094]

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

Don't even think about trying to patronise me. Anyone who believes Michael Jackson is on those bogus songs deserves to be lied to.

I patronise someone who patronises and they warn me not to patronise... get over your self grandeur, everything that is asked and said is to do with the topic, if you cant answer them your opinion is not solid and therefor either partly or completely false

 

[fzsky]

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

I don't know why you're even engaging him in such a ridiculous thought.

It's 1:25 in the morning here in Japan. Maybe I was trying to have some fun before sleep.
Also, since this is a debate thread we have (sort of) the responsibility to react on any kind of thoughts, ridiculous or not.

 

[larry141094]

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

Exactly.

larry, thoughts on this? Are you going to tell me this is just two similar voices? I have never, ever heard anyone even do this kind of "falsetto". But I guess it's a coincidence that an MJ sound alike, Jason Malachi did it at the same time Michael for the first and only time did it?

(listen in 480p)
[youtube]ffjawSAF-EY[/youtube]


You don't know this FYI. They might have heard the songs, without having any kinds of thoughts about it being another artist.

Again, we don't know anything. Sony might as have been knowing all along. Yes, I believe they are kind of "evil" and capable of doing such.

For one i acknowlage the obvious similarities in those highs, from those alone many would come to the conclusion that it is the same person, i came to a different conclusion when i put the album "Critical" on my iPod and mixed the songs with the Cascio tracks, i then played the playlist in repeat, there are times where the Cascio tracks sound very similar or almost identical to Jason Malachi's Critical album, but i drew the conclusion that these similarities were for a few seconds max, and overall Jason could not continue with his MJ like tone, i deemed it (with all the songs he's made) impossible for him to have sounded that different over a entire song.

 

[larry141094]

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

I don't know why you're even engaging him in such a ridiculous thought. He's basically saying 'if I blindfold you and then ask you to pick out members of your family from their voices, you wouldn't be able to do it'. Yes. You would be able to. And that's how close Michael's voice is to most of us. It's a preposterous analogy. From someone desperately trying to deflect attention from the actual bogus nature of the vocals.

Once again you pick parts of a statement i made and change it to suit your insult, read my post again

 

[Roosje]

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

but i drew the conclusion that these similarities were for a few seconds max, and overall Jason could not continue with his MJ like tone, i deemed it (with all the songs he's made) impossible for him to have sounded that different over a entire song.

I agree.

This is what's troubling me about this thread. I want to keep an open mind about this topic (I think the tracks are real, but I don't think there is zero possibility that they are fake) but these Jason comparisons are just not convincing at all to me. He only sounds like MJ in little glimpses, instances. Never has one of his leaked songs come close to fooling me it was Michael. There are way better sound-alikes out there. Despite the accent, I even think the cab driver that is making the rounds now is more similar to MJ than Malachi. I wonder if all the doubters think it is Malachi on the Cascio tracks. If so, I can't be convinced this is not Michael.

 

[Arklove]

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

I wonder if all the doubters think it is Malachi on the Cascio tracks.

To me, it doesn't really matter WHO it is singing on those songs. What matters is that it's not Michael Jackson.

 

[Pentum]

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

the Cascio tracks sound very similar or almost identical to Jason Malachi's Critical album, but i drew the conclusion that these similarities were for a few seconds max, and overall Jason could not continue with his MJ like tone, i deemed it (with all the songs he's made) impossible for him to have sounded that different over a entire song.

You are forgetting that they obviously mixed and tweaked Jason's voice to sound as much as MJ as possible.

You are also forgetting that Jason or even MJ at many times, never did a song in one entire take. Especially Jason. He sings a few lines, listens to it, does it sound good? Bad? One more time, all through the song.

I'm posting my three videos, along with a souncloud clip focusing on All I Need. I'd like to hear your thoughts after listening to all of them at least two times, larry.

Now, pretend that you trust your own ears.

[youtube]ffjawSAF-EY[/youtube] (you just heard this)
[youtube]U5IzeQAjA0s[/youtube]
[youtube]ZntDbE2mVG4[/youtube]
All I Need: http://soundcloud.com/pentum/all-i-need-compm

 

[Roosje]

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

To me, it doesn't really matter WHO it is singing on those songs. What matters is that it's not Michael Jackson.

Ok. But it's come up in this thread so often that sometimes it seems more like an 'prove it's JM thread', which is not interesting for people who want to hear different perspectives and possibilities.

Did you read my question directed to you from 2 pages ago?

 

[Arklove]

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

Ok. But it's come up in this thread so often that sometimes it seems more like an 'prove it's JM thread', which is not interesting for people who want to hear different perspectives and possibilities.

Did you read my question directed to you from 2 pages ago?

If you read the thread, you'll see TONS of different perspectives and possibilities; it's just a matter of what you want to believe. Excuses upon excuses to explain why it really is Michael Jackson. Why do you need so many perspectives, possibilities, and excuses? Doesn't that alarm you that you need all of that to justify WHY it's Michael Jackson? I don't need all that. I trust my ears, simple as that. I don't think I can stress that enough.

No, I didn't read your question. What was it?

 

[Roosje]

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

^True. But the Malachi consensus is just taking over the discussion very often. That's perfectly alright if that is what is truly believed by so many, but I was just wondering if it really was. For me, it's making the discussion a lot less interesting as I think Malachi just has nothing to do with this at all.


My question, but I waver to ask now as you seem very certain of your opinion now...

^Arklove: just wondering, I might be wrong, but I can remember you being a lot less certain when this started out. You were hesitant at first, openminded, wanted it to be Michael. What has solified it into an unshakable truth for you that it isn't him? Just curious...

 

[Arklove]

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

My question, but I waver to ask now as you seem very certain of your opinion now...

Of course I wanted to believe it was Michael. I didn't want to believe that this could be fraud. Actually, I was sure it had to be a joke, a PR stunt. I even bought the album, thinking that MAYBE the voice would actually be Michael Jackson and they were f*cking with us the entire time. The first time I heard every single Cascio track, my instinct and ears told me it wasn't Michael. Of course, logic had to come into question at one point. I TRIED to hear him on those songs, and if I had any doubt, they stemmed from the fact that I didn't want to believe they'd do this to him. Keep in mind, I went from small doubt to 100% convinced it's not him because I chose to stick with my instincts, and my own ears....NOT what the Estate or anyone else told me.

 

[Roosje]

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

^Ok, thanks for explaining.

Will nothing be able to convince you otherwise? Instincts are above it all? I understand and respect that of course, but the truth of the matter is that no logical arguments matter if people feel this way. Which makes this discussion quite useless in my opnion. At least for the convincing part, maybe it's important to have it to share these feelings. But a debate it's not.

 

[Arklove]

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

^Ok, thanks for explaining.

Will nothing be able to convince you otherwise? Instincts are above it all? I understand and respect that of course, but the truth of the matter is that no logical arguments matter if people feel this way. Which makes this discussion quite useless in my opnion. At least for the convincing part, maybe it's important to have it to share these feelings. But a debate it's not.

You're welcome. And, no nothing will convince me otherwise. I am 100% certain it's not him. Logic and a statement from the Estate cannot change what I hear. Not in the beginning, not now, and not ever. Yes, instincts are above it all for me. Absolutely. If you can't trust your instincts and your own hearing, what can you trust?

You're right. It's not a debate. However, I'm still disgusted at what is being done to Michael, and this is the place where I discuss it with those who believe the same as me. I'm not here to convince anyone. I've said before, I don't care if someone labels me as stubborn...Deep down in my heart, I know it's not him.

 

[donalb]

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

For me, the truth about these tracks became evident once I stopped focussing on the "logic", excuses, explanations, lyrics, etc., and just listened to the lead vocals. In doing so, it was quite easy for me to identify several words in all of the lead vocals that are clearly not sung by Michael Jackson. As both Sony/the Estate claim that the lead vocals are 100% Michael, I have no choice but to conclude that these songs are not what they are advertised to be. In other words they are "fake".

 

[Arklove]

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

As both Sony/the Estate claim that the lead vocals are 100% Michael, I have no choice but to conclude that these songs are not what they are advertised to be. In other words they are "fake".

Exactly. It says it right there in the statement. 100% Michael Jackson on lead vocals? So, if that's true, then WHY did forensics have to come in and identify them as such? If it was 100% Michael Jackson on lead vocals, you'd be able to hear that! Just like every other Michael Jackson song we've ever heard. Even the believers have stated that there is something 'different' about the voice, even though they believe, ultimately, that it's Michael Jackson. Think about it.

 

[Arklove]

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

^^ Are you saying this is standard procedure? If so, where in that statement does it allude that?

 

[love is magical]

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

The cascio tracks were put onto the album, as they were best suited for it, the other cascio tracks did not make it onto the album, the point is, we are not looking for proof, as we have none, we are looking for an opinion that cannot be proven wrong no matter what you throw at it.

My reasoning for believing that Sony put the Cascio tracks on the album was a simple business reason, they wouldn't spend money on something until they knew what they were getting, they would have had the testing done on the tracks before they bought them, in order to make sure that what they were paying for was what they got.

Larry, could you tell me how your common sense explains the Milli Vanilli scandal. Common sense told you that Milli Vanilli supposed to be the vocalists on their albums. Common sense told you that Milli's record label wouldn't lie. But, reality was?

The Cascio tracks were put onto the album because they were best suited for it. For what may I ask? For saving genuine Michael Jackson songs for future releases I'm afraid. Sony is a business. Of course every decision they made is a business decision, not artistic decision. Does Sony care whether Michael Jackson really worked on those songs? No, Sony doesn't. What Sony cares about is sales. As long as there are enough people who believe the vocals are Michael Jackson's and buy the albums, Sony is doing okay.

 

[kopwatcher]

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

It doesn't. It implied that only the Cascio tracks warranted extensive testing.