Michael - The Great Album Debate

[BottleOfSmoke]

Here, please read this article and compare the situation to ours:



Article Overview: Nearly thirty four years after The King’s death, a new song has been discovered and confirmed forensically to be Elvis Presley himself. Ed Primeau was contacted by WWMT TV 3, the CBS affiliate in Kalamazoo and Grand Rapids Michigan, to use his voice identification expertise to confirm the song is genuine..





New Elvis Song Discovered

Nearly thirty four years after The King’s death, a new song has been discovered and confirmed forensically to be the king himself, Elvis Presley. Ed Primeau was contacted by Mike Chesney of WWMT TV 3, the CBS affiliate in Kalamazoo and Grand Rapids Michigan, to use his voice identification expertise to confirm the song is genuine.

Ed Primeau is president of Primeau Productions, Inc. based out of Rochester Hills, Michigan, as well as a well-respected audio and video forensic expert.

The TV crew arrived about 10 am last Tuesday and gave Ed the three versions of the song “Living to Love You” which was written by a deceased Grand Rapids resident and performed by Elvis Presley. The crew filmed Ed’s forensic investigation and then interviewed him about his conclusion.

Ed’s theory is that while in the Detroit area in 1976, Elvis had an interest in this song whose lyrics made their way to the King prior to his visit. According to Primeau, “Elvis liked the song and recorded a demo, which is what we have in these recordings.”

The three versions are vocals and piano only and do not sound like an Elvis song, which may be a huge reason why the song was not recorded and released. Primeau referred the film crew to Gary Graff, an icon rock journalist and Billbord magazine columnist who is a friend of Primeau’s and local Metro Detroit Area resident. He also confirmed the song to be Elvis himself. Graff also commented on Primea's forensic credentials and conclusion in the video interview.

There are three criteria for conducting voice identification: critical listening skills, electronic measurement and visual inspection of the sound wave. “Living to Love You” was compared to two other Elvis songs recorded around the same time that served as an exemplar of Elvis Presley’s voice. The vocal tone, vibrato and style of singing is an identical match to Elvis Presley.

Traditionally, a voice identification test includes the forensic expert making an exemplar of the person in questions voice to compare with the recording in question. Since Elvis is dead, Primeau used the two songs the TV crew provided and he agreed on them as exemplars.

Primeau noted the vibrato resonance and style matched Elvis Presley’s. Primeau went further and downloaded a sample of an Elvis impersonator from the Internet and compared that voice to the recordings in question. Using digital spectrograph technology, Primeau compared the two known Elvis songs, the three takes of “Living to Love You”, the impersonator and a Neil Diamond song. The spectrographic readings confirmed Primeau’s opinion and displayed the obvious results for the TV crew.

The significance of this new song by Elvis Presley is that it will stimulate fan interest in existing Elvis material and fetch a generous amount of money at auction, should that ever happen. It has been a long time since the king released any material and his estate Graceland is yet to comment on the discovery.



source:
http://www.evancarmichael.com/Marketing/5504/New-Elvis-Song-Discovered.html#author

I am sorry, but I don't see ANY of this in the Estate's report. The Estate's report compared to this article is a JOKE!

Excellent example!

 

[ADKIc3mAnX]

^^A failure, by Michael Jackson's standards.

The name Michael Jackson and the fact that it was his first posthumous release helped in selling all those copies, not the content of the album itself. The release itself isn't that impressive no matter how you look at it and quite frankly, I agree with the people who gave it 2/5 stars.

It's not a failure considering all the controversy and it was not promoted as good as This Is It so yes it's a big difference but better than many artists now a day.


@BottleOfSmoke The albums sales came mainly from physical copies as 90% of music sales come from.

 

[T.N.A.]

It's not a failure considering all the controversy

Actually it is a failure, controversy or not. And there's plenty of things they could have done to make it... uh, less of a failure, to say the least.

A better title, better track list, more songs, no fake tracks, deluxe editions with demos, better single choices, better videos for them... feel free to stop me whenever you want, cause I can keep going .

and it was not promoted as good as This Is It so yes it's a big difference

And again, who's fault is it? I was simply pointing out how much they've screwed up and how the album is a total failure (by Michael's standards of course). The controversy is their fault and so is the lack of promotion (and by 'they' I mean both Sony and the Estate).

I think I have more than enough reasons to call them a bunch of greedy corporate bastards, who could care less about Michael's legacy or what his fans want. I'm sick and tired of this whole "Oh, we do care, but shut up and let us do whatever we want with your dead idol's music" attitude.

but better than many artists now a day.

Not relevant, hence the 'by Michael's standards' comment from my previous post.

 

[Pentum]

Wow, Bumper. Amazing find - they showed everything the MJ Estate did not show.

Vibrato counts a lot as well as style. Cascio singer's vibrato is not like MJ. FACT.

 

[kreen]

I strongly believe, based on the overwhelming evidence in the songs themselves, that he is, without a doubt, the vocalist on these tracks.

"Without a doubt". And that is why you fail. Because if there is something anybody can see, it's the ENORMOUS amount of doubt there is in this whole affair.

Also : if the evidence is overwhelming, and there is no doubt, why have you not launched a lawsuit yet?

 

[Billyjeanplxiv]

money.

 

[kreen]

Here, please read this article and compare the situation to ours:



Article Overview: Nearly thirty four years after The King’s death, a new song has been discovered and confirmed forensically to be Elvis Presley himself. Ed Primeau was contacted by WWMT TV 3, the CBS affiliate in Kalamazoo and Grand Rapids Michigan, to use his voice identification expertise to confirm the song is genuine..





New Elvis Song Discovered

Nearly thirty four years after The King’s death, a new song has been discovered and confirmed forensically to be the king himself, Elvis Presley. Ed Primeau was contacted by Mike Chesney of WWMT TV 3, the CBS affiliate in Kalamazoo and Grand Rapids Michigan, to use his voice identification expertise to confirm the song is genuine.

Ed Primeau is president of Primeau Productions, Inc. based out of Rochester Hills, Michigan, as well as a well-respected audio and video forensic expert.

The TV crew arrived about 10 am last Tuesday and gave Ed the three versions of the song “Living to Love You” which was written by a deceased Grand Rapids resident and performed by Elvis Presley. The crew filmed Ed’s forensic investigation and then interviewed him about his conclusion.

Ed’s theory is that while in the Detroit area in 1976, Elvis had an interest in this song whose lyrics made their way to the King prior to his visit. According to Primeau, “Elvis liked the song and recorded a demo, which is what we have in these recordings.”

The three versions are vocals and piano only and do not sound like an Elvis song, which may be a huge reason why the song was not recorded and released. Primeau referred the film crew to Gary Graff, an icon rock journalist and Billbord magazine columnist who is a friend of Primeau’s and local Metro Detroit Area resident. He also confirmed the song to be Elvis himself. Graff also commented on Primea's forensic credentials and conclusion in the video interview.

There are three criteria for conducting voice identification: critical listening skills, electronic measurement and visual inspection of the sound wave. “Living to Love You” was compared to two other Elvis songs recorded around the same time that served as an exemplar of Elvis Presley’s voice. The vocal tone, vibrato and style of singing is an identical match to Elvis Presley.

Traditionally, a voice identification test includes the forensic expert making an exemplar of the person in questions voice to compare with the recording in question. Since Elvis is dead, Primeau used the two songs the TV crew provided and he agreed on them as exemplars.

Primeau noted the vibrato resonance and style matched Elvis Presley’s. Primeau went further and downloaded a sample of an Elvis impersonator from the Internet and compared that voice to the recordings in question. Using digital spectrograph technology, Primeau compared the two known Elvis songs, the three takes of “Living to Love You”, the impersonator and a Neil Diamond song. The spectrographic readings confirmed Primeau’s opinion and displayed the obvious results for the TV crew.

The significance of this new song by Elvis Presley is that it will stimulate fan interest in existing Elvis material and fetch a generous amount of money at auction, should that ever happen. It has been a long time since the king released any material and his estate Graceland is yet to comment on the discovery.



source:
http://www.evancarmichael.com/Marketing/5504/New-Elvis-Song-Discovered.html#author

I am sorry, but I don't see ANY of this in the Estate's report. The Estate's report compared to this article is a JOKE!

Answer me this : if this exact same article came up in support of the authenticity of the Cascio tracks, would you then change your mind and admit they are authentic?

 

[kreen]

I can't believe people are advocating the buying of fake albums on twitter like it is the be and all and end all of Michael's legacy.

Something I don't understand : you're incredibly anti-Cascio, yet your avatar promotes an album, "Immortal", of which every single sale profits financially Eddie Cascio and James Porte, whose song "Monster" is included on the album. Isn't that sort of inconsistent on your part?

 

[Willy]

Great find Bumber. Funny thing is Elvis fans claim it's an imersonator as it doesn't sound like to late 70s Elvis, more of like the 50s-60s one. According to the youtube comments, Sony end the Elvis Presly Estate have released a statement saying this is not Elvis Presley on this recording.

 

[SoCav]

Very interesting find Bumper!

I found this video about the Elvis song in which Primeau is interviewed and in which the analysis is further explained.

 

[Pentum]

Would like to have a report like that on the fake songs.

 

[SoCav]

Answer me this : if this exact same article came up in support of the authenticity of the Cascio tracks, would you then change your mind and admit they are authentic?

For me: no, because as we have discussed several times, forensic vocal analysis is not a foolproof method. However, a report like this would give the Estate's statement and the believers' argument a lot more credibility in my eyes. It would give us an opportunity to analyze what the forensic expert did, what he potentially left out, and so on. However, unless there were proper explanations for why Michael would sound so different, there would still be a lot of reasons to doubt the conclusion of such an analysis. Just like a scientific theory is not accepted on the basis of one study that shows support for it, I too would like to see replication first, before drawing strong conclusions. I would be very interested in seeing a second opinion from another analyst.

I would be much less disappointed in the Estate however. Although I would still disagree with the decision to include these tracks (why release tracks for which you need a audio forensic expert in the first place, when there are so many better alternatives), it would make me believe that they at least took reasonable steps to check whether the tracks were actually authentic or not.

 

[Arklove]

Honestly, the articles Bumpy posted make the Estate's statement look like that of one written on a napkin with a crayon

 

[WhoIsIt89]

"Without a doubt". And that is why you fail. Because if there is something anybody can see, it's the ENORMOUS amount of doubt there is in this whole affair.

Also : if the evidence is overwhelming, and there is no doubt, why have you not launched a lawsuit yet?

Because someone hasn't begun a lawsuit, it doesn't mean that there isn't enough evidence that points to one thing nor does it make anyone's opinion any less valuable. I don't know how easy you think it is for regular everyday people like us to launch a lawsuit against a monopoly like Sony, but I would imagine that it isn't as simple as it seems.

 

[ivy]

Here, please read this article and compare the situation to ours:

I am sorry, but I don't see ANY of this in the Estate's report. The Estate's report compared to this article is a JOKE!

well that article is a lot closer to our situation but not as you think.

that's the song Elvis Estate responded as "not even close to Elvis".

and the Elvis fan community is divided. Some think that the person, the expert and the lawyer is coming up with the scheme of a fake song for money. and some think the song is legit but Elvis Presley Estate do not want to admit the song being real and pay for it.

So only thing that article confirms is that regardless of the detail and the analysis given, there would forever be two opinions to any authenticity issue. and as you can see releasing details and names and giving the report to Elvis Estate lawyer etc. did not result in an agreement.

Edited to add:

Months ago I said it was futile attempt. My opinion still stands. Here's a question to you.

Assume that they release the expert reports tomorrow. You see top experts that are indeed the best in their area, you'll see hundreds of page of detailed explanations, you see high confidence rates and probabilities. Even assume that compared all the sound alikes including Malachi. And you see the end result to be "Michael".

What then? Are you going to say "okay I was wrong it's Michael"? Will it going to change what you hear? For example How are you going to explain the accent and pronunciation issues then?

 

[SoCav]

well that article is a lot closer to our situation but not as you think.

that's the song Elvis Estate responded as "not even close to Elvis".

and the Elvis fan community is divided. Some think that the person, the expert and the lawyer is coming up with the scheme of a fake song for money. and some think the song is legit but Elvis Presley Estate do not want to admit the song being real and pay for it.

So only thing that article confirms is that regardless of the detail and the analysis given, there would forever be two opinions to any authenticity issue. and as you can see releasing details and names and giving the report to Elvis Estate lawyer etc. did not result in an agreement.

Unless I misread his post, I did not get the impression that Bumper meant that if the Estate had posted such a detailed report the argument would be over. However, this is an example of a proper way to publish a statement, because it shows us what was done and how.

But your point still stands. If anything, this case imo goes to show that although it is absolutely important to take into account, we should not put too much stock in one single forensic vocal analysis (especially if we have not even seen it).

Edited to add:

Assume that they release the expert reports tomorrow. You see top experts that are indeed the best in their area, you'll see hundreds of page of detailed explanations, you see high confidence rates and probabilities. Even assume that compared all the sound alikes including Malachi. And you see the end result to be "Michael".

What then? Are you going to say "okay I was wrong it's Michael"? Will it going to change what you hear? For example How are you going to explain the accent and pronunciation issues then?

For me this fully depends on what is written. If the report gives plausible and convincing explanations for the reason the voice on the Cascio tracks sounds so different from anything Michael has ever done and if it is clear that there is no match with Jason Malachi, then I would be happy to admit that I might have been wrong (although we still have to wonder why those involved came up with constantly different explanations for it, etc).

The key thing is just that it would give us a chance to see all the evidence that Sony/the Estate had at their disposal, which would allow us to make a much better informed judgement about the authenticity of these songs. If Sony/the Estate are fully confident about these tracks, than the evidence should justify that.

 

[ivy]

But your point still stands. If anything, this case imo goes to show that although it is absolutely important to take into account, we should not put too much stock in one single forensic vocal analysis (especially if we have not even seen it).

I edited my post above but my point is this

- regardless of how much info, name or report detail was given it would not change what people hear. In other words even if you are given a 200 page report with all the details and tests and the names you want saying it's Michael, I don't think it will change your opinion.

- Elvis example show us that giving names, details etc does not end the controversy or does not stop people having two different opinions. As this is a posthumous release and as the only person to confirm and deny is gone, the arguments will be there/

 

[StellaJackson]

"Without a doubt". And that is why you fail. Because if there is something anybody can see, it's the ENORMOUS amount of doubt there is in this whole affair.

Also : if the evidence is overwhelming, and there is no doubt, why have you not launched a lawsuit yet?

And here we go with the lawsuit nonsense again. People like me do not have the time and money to file a lawsuit. It doesn't work like that in this country (UK). And I never said it was something anybody can see. Just that it is obvious to those who have been listening to both MJ and JM for as long as I have. To me personally it is obvious and until someone can prove (please do) that it is Michael then that's just the way it is. You have nothing to back your own argument up so you resort to the "file a lawsuit" tactic or the preferred method of your ilk which is anti-Jackson propaganda. Hurts doesn't it?

 

[SoCav]

I edited my post above but my point is this

- regardless of how much info, name or report detail was given it would not change what people hear. In other words even if you are given a 200 page report with all the details and tests and the names you want saying it's Michael, I don't think it will change your opinion.

- Elvis example show us that giving names, details etc does not end the controversy or does not stop people having two different opinions. As this is a posthumous release and as the only person to confirm and deny is gone, the arguments will be there/

Sorry, I just edited my post above to respond to your addendum.

I think whether opinions are changed or not strongly depends on the strength of the evidence. If it is very strong, I do not see why opinions would not be changed. If we get a very detailed report containing the two forensic analyses that were (independently) conducted, that include all proper tests and good and valid explanations, I can certainly see myself at the very least weakening my stance. Would I take a very critical look at the report? Sure, but I think that can only be a good thing.

The problem is that at the moment, I have no reason to believe all proper tests (such as a comparison with both Michael and Malachi) were done, or that convincing explanations exist for the difference in the vocals. Indeed, I am not even sure whether I should believe that tests were conducted at all. Our judgements now are to a great extent based on whatever we hear and on what the Estate/other people that were involved tell us. I would love it if we got the chance to base our opinions on more than just that.

Again, if we are to believe that the evidence is really so convincing that it lead the Estate to release these songs despite their own doubts, then I do not see why they would not share it with us. Wouldn't they want to get rid of the controversy?

 

[StellaJackson]

Something I don't understand : you're incredibly anti-Cascio, yet your avatar promotes an album, "Immortal", of which every single sale profits financially Eddie Cascio and James Porte, whose song "Monster" is included on the album. Isn't that sort of inconsistent on your part?

I am not anti-Cascio. You are starting to sound like a broken record with that one. I simply don't hear Michael in these songs. I hear an impersonator. And I want sufficient answers for that, which so far haven't been given. As for my avatar, you've tried this attempted guilt trip before and frankly it's laughable. My avatar is not of the Immortal soundtrack, it is of the show. See where it says the words "world tour"? The show contains the opening voiceovers from BN mixed under the opening to Tabloid Junkie as well as one line from 50's rap. It doesn't feature any of the lead vocals from the songs, which is where my issue lies. I don't care about Cascio and Porte. I believe they have some serious questions to answer but I am not "anti-Cascio." I am certainly not going to let them negatively affect something (Immortal tour) which I think overall is a positive thing for MJ.

It's quite sad how you are incapable of answering any of the difficult questions surrounding these songs and so reduce yourself to picking faults with others.

 

[Korgnex]

Just that it is obvious to those who have been listening to both MJ and JM for as long as I have.

Hubris.

 

[StellaJackson]

Hubris.

Lol. Whatever. Tick tock.

 

[teli-mj]

Here, please read this article and compare the situation to ours:



Article Overview: Nearly thirty four years after The King’s death, a new song has been discovered and confirmed forensically to be Elvis Presley himself. Ed Primeau was contacted by WWMT TV 3, the CBS affiliate in Kalamazoo and Grand Rapids Michigan, to use his voice identification expertise to confirm the song is genuine..





New Elvis Song Discovered

Nearly thirty four years after The King’s death, a new song has been discovered and confirmed forensically to be the king himself, Elvis Presley. Ed Primeau was contacted by Mike Chesney of WWMT TV 3, the CBS affiliate in Kalamazoo and Grand Rapids Michigan, to use his voice identification expertise to confirm the song is genuine.

Ed Primeau is president of Primeau Productions, Inc. based out of Rochester Hills, Michigan, as well as a well-respected audio and video forensic expert.

The TV crew arrived about 10 am last Tuesday and gave Ed the three versions of the song “Living to Love You” which was written by a deceased Grand Rapids resident and performed by Elvis Presley. The crew filmed Ed’s forensic investigation and then interviewed him about his conclusion.

Ed’s theory is that while in the Detroit area in 1976, Elvis had an interest in this song whose lyrics made their way to the King prior to his visit. According to Primeau, “Elvis liked the song and recorded a demo, which is what we have in these recordings.”

The three versions are vocals and piano only and do not sound like an Elvis song, which may be a huge reason why the song was not recorded and released. Primeau referred the film crew to Gary Graff, an icon rock journalist and Billbord magazine columnist who is a friend of Primeau’s and local Metro Detroit Area resident. He also confirmed the song to be Elvis himself. Graff also commented on Primea's forensic credentials and conclusion in the video interview.

There are three criteria for conducting voice identification: critical listening skills, electronic measurement and visual inspection of the sound wave. “Living to Love You” was compared to two other Elvis songs recorded around the same time that served as an exemplar of Elvis Presley’s voice. The vocal tone, vibrato and style of singing is an identical match to Elvis Presley.

Traditionally, a voice identification test includes the forensic expert making an exemplar of the person in questions voice to compare with the recording in question. Since Elvis is dead, Primeau used the two songs the TV crew provided and he agreed on them as exemplars.

Primeau noted the vibrato resonance and style matched Elvis Presley’s. Primeau went further and downloaded a sample of an Elvis impersonator from the Internet and compared that voice to the recordings in question. Using digital spectrograph technology, Primeau compared the two known Elvis songs, the three takes of “Living to Love You”, the impersonator and a Neil Diamond song. The spectrographic readings confirmed Primeau’s opinion and displayed the obvious results for the TV crew.

The significance of this new song by Elvis Presley is that it will stimulate fan interest in existing Elvis material and fetch a generous amount of money at auction, should that ever happen. It has been a long time since the king released any material and his estate Graceland is yet to comment on the discovery.



source:
http://www.evancarmichael.com/Marketing/5504/New-Elvis-Song-Discovered.html#author

I am sorry, but I don't see ANY of this in the Estate's report. The Estate's report compared to this article is a JOKE!

Brilliant post

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

Answer me this : if this exact same article came up in support of the authenticity of the Cascio tracks, would you then change your mind and admit they are authentic?

My honest answer is this: I would look forward to reading what they have to say about the shaky vibrato that does not match with Michael's, the accent, the intonation and all the things that are reported in that article. I would also look forward to reading why they don't think it is not the soundalike, the same way this musicologist explained, and I'll most certainly give them much, much, more credit than their simple words without any detail. Read their report again and read the article, and you'll see a huge difference in credibility as far as arguments are concerned.

Would I change my mind? I woudln't hear anything differently, but I most certainly would open the possibility that MJ might have sung those songs if I had some names and clear and plausible explanation. Unfortunately, as far as my linguistical analysis goes, the supposed MJ on the Cascio tracks elides his "t"s in the middle of the words, and I would like to know why would he do that all of sudden.

well that article is a lot closer to our situation but not as you think.

Maybe not as I think, but much closer than to as you think.

Let me see:

-leading: doesn't seem to be a problem, since he downloaded himself the soundalike to test the vibrato and so on
-due diligence: seems to be absent, indeed he rather downloaded the soundalike's voice than asking him if he was involved
-anonimity: doesn't seem to be problematic to reveal his identity and suffer Elvis Presley's fans "harassement"
-Q&A session: doesn't seem to be a problem since he gave a public interview
-What was analysed: the article clearly mentions different versions of the songs and what exactly was analyzed including the soundalike
-How it was analysed: the article explains what is necessary to compare in order to draw conclusions
-Transparency: doesn't seem to be a problem, since the forensic accepted to be filmed during the whole analysis.
-Respectability & credentials: the forensic in question is not an amateur, he is well respected and has required credentials to do such a job

Now, I don't know why you say it is not how I think, but it clearly beats every and each argument you put forward in defense for the Estate: due diligence, leading, etc.

You wanted some critical thinking, well let's then compare this article with the Estate's and, please, be my guest and offer your objective critics bewteen the very content of the two articles regardless of what you believe or who you believe.

that's the song Elvis Estate responded as "not even close to Elvis".

Now all of sudden the Estate is the one who knows better than the forensics?
Anyway, at least Elvis's Estate did not release the problematic tracks, MJ's didn't care.

and the Elvis fan community is divided. Some think that the person, the expert and the lawyer is coming up with the scheme of a fake song for money. and some think the song is legit but Elvis Presley Estate do not want to admit the song being real and pay for it.

Well, unfortunately MJ's Estate isn't as vigilent as Elvis's. From the moment there is a doubt, it stinks. But not to MJ's Estate apparently.

So only thing that article confirms is that regardless of the detail and the analysis given, there would forever be two opinions to any authenticity issue. and as you can see releasing details and names and giving the report to Elvis Estate lawyer etc. did not result in an agreement.

You are trying to shift towards something that has nothing to do with my point when posting that article. I said, the Estate's report is a joke compared to that article, because I don't see any of what is written in that article in the Estate's report, regardless of people's opinions. And every time when I asked why this thing or that thing is lacking in the Etsate report, every time you came up with explanations such as "harassement", leading, protection of anonimty, etc, etc. Again, I don't know why you are talking about people's divison of opinions when I am comparing the Estate's content with the content of this article poitning out that this article contains everything that the Estate's report does not.

Edited to add:

Months ago I said it was futile attempt. My opinion still stands.

Well a few posts back you wanted some critical reasoning, now all I see is sticking to your opinion no matter what is shown in front of your eyes in an extremely similar situation i.e. authenticity doubt and well respected forensic analysis.

Here's a question to you.

Assume that they release the expert reports tomorrow. You see top experts that are indeed the best in their area, you'll see hundreds of page of detailed explanations, you see high confidence rates and probabilities. Even assume that compared all the sound alikes including Malachi. And you see the end result to be "Michael".

What then? Are you going to say "okay I was wrong it's Michael"? Will it going to change what you hear?

The problem is that they didn't do it, so I am very sceptical to even imagine that they'd come up with 'its Michael" answer. However, let's say hypothetically, they compare Malachi and MJ and the Cascio songs and they explain why they believe it is not Malachi and what matches with what and what was compared, then yes, I would probably give the due credit if their theory is that strong. The truth is, in real life right here and now we only have the Etsate's report with extremely poor information and Seth Rigg's silence.

For example How are you going to explain the accent and pronunciation issues then?

First, this is what I am asking the believers in this very situation. What causes "Michael" to elide his "t"s all of sudden?
Second, the explanation would have to be provided by the forensics, not by me.
Third, in case the forensics don't explain it, I'd look forward to a Q&A session and ask that question. If they come up with a plausible answer, then I'd believe them. If they seem to be hesitating with the answer, well then the doubt would remain.

But I'd definitely consider the Estate's report much more professional and credible if they really did the job they were supposed to do. They did the minimum and gave their word, that's the reality and I wonder how come believers can accept that and even have defensive arguments for something that should have been publicly released a year and a half ago in order to clear up all the doubts.

I edited my post above but my point is this

- regardless of how much info, name or report detail was given it would not change what people hear. In other words even if you are given a 200 page report with all the details and tests and the names you want saying it's Michael, I don't think it will change your opinion.

If something is scientifically explainable and clearly demonstrated why people hear this and not that, then it would change people's mind. And even if we speculate and think if it didn't change people's mind, at least their report would be much more professional than Teddy's "This is Michael Jackson", or Eddie's picture of an empty studio or the Estate's report empty of content (there is nothing in their report).

- Elvis example show us that giving names, details etc does not end the controversy or does not stop people having two different opinions. As this is a posthumous release and as the only person to confirm and deny is gone, the arguments will be there/

Elvis's example shows that there is:

-no due diligence
-no anonimty
-no fear of leading
-no fear of harassement
-no hesitation to explain what was compared
-no hesitation to explain how it was analysed
-no hesitation to film the whole procedure
-no hesitation for forensic interview
-no release of the songs by the Estate because of the division and the doubt
-no fear from the Estate to tell the forensic that the song sounds nothing like Elvis
and the list goes down...

I just don't understand why is it a problem to criticise MJ's Estate to give us all the details. I always have impression that you defend more the Estate and their decision interpreting them as this or that, to actually the detriment of access to more info about all this mess. Wouldn't you like to have more info? Why accepting the minimum (their word) when we could have detailed info about this mess.

You make it sound as if the forensic were going to be harassed and as if it would lead to the thrid world war. But in reality, we're only talking about some songs. People don't give a damn about the songs, only MJ fans do. I doubt we'd provoke a nuclear war if we got more info.

 

[ivy]

Well the Elvis example is other way around and it doesn't include a court assigned executors that can lose their position due to their actions. They would of course show due diligence before a release , Elvis estate has no need for due diligence because they are denying the song.

Fear of leading is only relevant in a lawsuit, that person is not trying to come up with an analysis that would stand up in court, his only reasoning is trying to convince Elvis Estate.

-no anonymity & no fear of harassment - again not released song and again there's no issue of lawsuit here. it's a song that's put online, anyone can listen to it and can believe it or not. there's no reason for harassment.

-no hesitation to explain what was compared
-no hesitation to explain how it was analysed
-no hesitation to film the whole procedure
-no hesitation for forensic interview

of course not because they are trying to convince the Elvis Estate the songs are legit.The only way to make their point is to create a buzz. And if you followed it, they only went public after Elvis Estate didn't really respond to their initial requests to talk.

-no release of the songs by the Estate because of the division and the doubt

sorry but here you are making things up. Estate didn't & won't release the song simply because they don't accept the song as legit. The release has got nothing to do with the division or doubt. It's not like they got the song but then not decided to release it. They rejected the song.

-no fear from the Estate to tell the forensic that the song sounds nothing like Elvis

and MJ Estate had no fear to tell doubters that they were confident in their results

and for the record you are seriously mixing up leading, due diligence concepts with unrelated stuff

 

[love is magical]

Seems like I've missed a lot. I'll slowly catch up. Just wanna say hi for now. :hiya:I'm still alive. Work has been killing me lately.

 

[Petrarose]

Maybe we, doubters are all nutcases...

Look at for example Arklove, she's not right in her mind. Then, when you read Love Is Magical comments, you feel she's completely off the wall. Not to mention Socav's nonsense. And StellaJackson's comments are all but logical. As far as TNA is concerned, he's never straight to the point. Regarding AZSummergirl, it's obvious she's not a real fan. Jesta, Aniram, Samhabib, MikeKingJ, MJJLatvia, Lucilla, Qbee, Ginvid, Chamife, BillieJanplxv, Claudionia, and many, many, more here, we're actually all loco, nuts, cuckoo... and we are all psychologically influenced that we hear JM more than MJ. As far as I am concerned, I am so nuts that I don't even know what I am talking about and even less what I hear. We doubters are lame, yeah!

^^HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA funny!!!

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

And this is how all of sudden a well respected audio and video forensic who provided all the info about the analysis is not taken seriously (yet MJ's Estate forensic, who never provided anything is inexplicably more trusted):

Well the Elvis example is other way around and it doesn't include a court assigned executors that can lose their position due to their actions. They would of course show due diligence before a release , Elvis estate has no need for due diligence because they are denying the song.

Fear of leading is only relevant in a lawsuit, that person is not trying to come up with an analysis that would stand up in court, his only reasoning is trying to convince Elvis Estate.

-no anonymity & no fear of harassment - again not released song and again there's no issue of lawsuit here. it's a song that's put online, anyone can listen to it and can believe it or not. there's no reason for harassment.

-no hesitation to explain what was compared
-no hesitation to explain how it was analysed
-no hesitation to film the whole procedure
-no hesitation for forensic interview

of course not because they are trying to convince the Elvis Estate the songs are legit.The only way to make their point is to create a buzz. And if you followed it, they only went public after Elvis Estate didn't really respond to their initial requests to talk.

-no release of the songs by the Estate because of the division and the doubt

sorry but here you are making things up. Estate didn't & won't release the song simply because they don't accept the song as legit. The release has got nothing to do with the division or doubt. It's not like they got the song but then not decided to release it. They rejected the song.

-no fear from the Estate to tell the forensic that the song sounds nothing like Elvis

and MJ Estate had no fear to tell doubters that they were confident in their results

and for the record you are seriously mixing up leading, due diligence concepts with unrelated stuff

Is that your critical reasoning? Burrying our heads in the sand and accept the huge lack of info from the Estate as shown in their report?

Ivy, I really don't understand all such excuses for the Estate's lack of info to the fans and at the same time accepting the not-shown analysis from the Estate's forensic andminimising the shown analysis of Elvis's well respected forensic. To me there is a contradiction in your reasoning because you seem first to defend the Estate's position before seeing what info is (not) provided to our detriment.

You say that I am mixing up things. But if you read the Estate's report, you'll see that I actuallt did not mix up anything. It is you who came up with your interpretations when talking about "due diligence" and "leading" arguments. The Estate never explained it that way (they could have).

Finally, you were the one introducing the idea of court of law, but we multiple times begged for the maximum to be done, not the minimum, outside the court of law, i.e. a scientific comparison of 3 samples: Cascio-MJ-JM (it cannot be leading if it"s scientific), and not two samples MJ-Cascio and right after burrying our heads in the sand and hiding behind the terms like "court of law", "leading", "due diligence", "protection of identity" as if it was the most dangerous criminal case we were dealing with, etc.

Again, I don't understand your attitude for not wanting more info and for defending their minimum info absolutely mute on many subjects regarding those tracks.

 

[azsummergirl]

@love_is_magical it's busy season, huh? it will all be over april 15th, no? then you'll be back?

to answer the question that was asked earlier: no. the estate could name any name, and have the most detailed report in the world and it STILL wouldn't change my opinion of these tracks. Nothing would. I have no problem saying that.

but that's not the point, is it? the point is that IF forensic analysis IS important to you, you should see an enormous difference between the elvis analysis and the michael analysis. And you should have a problem with that. their "analysis" was a total joke. they didn't even try to make it convincing. kind of like the songs themselves . . . why bother, us stupid mourning fans will buy anything.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

I have a few questions for the believers:

1) Why Elvis's Estate refuses to accept the track as genuine despite the shown thorough analysis of the well respected audio forensic?

2) As opposed to question number one, why MJ's Estate accepts the tracks as genuine after (reportedly but still not seen) analysis of (reportedly) well respected audio forensic?

3) How come believers are comfortable with believing the Estate's report without seeing a single proof or forensic's report and identity and at the same time seeing that in Elvis's case the Estate disagreed with the well respected forensic report leading to the FACT that the forensic report doesn't seem to be as scientific and as objective as claimed by the MJ's Estate in their report:

"This expert performed waveform analysis, an objective scientific test used to determine audio authenticity, on the Cascio tracks, as well as previously released tracks with Michael’s voice, and reported that ALL of the lead vocals analyzed (which included Cascio tracks) were the voice of Michael Jackson."
​

What did the Elvis's well respected forensic then do? A subjective non-scientific test? Am I the only one to see that Elvis's forensic used the same methods as MJ's forensics, yet not accepted as objective scientific test to determine audio authenticity?

​