Latest on MJJC

Michael - The Great Album Debate

StellaJackson said:
It's my unserstanding that the extent of the the investigation from Sony and the Estate consisted of the following:

- two phone calls from John Branca to Thad Nauden to ask if his client was involved with the recordings.
- a phone call from John Doelp at Sony to ask him the same thing
- a listening session with various people who had previously worked with Michael. Opinion was split. Some said it was, some said it wasn't and some weren't sure. The only consensus was that there were certain Mj trademarks that were mysteriously absent from the recordings? Only those who said they believed it was Michael had their name added to the statement from Wetzemann.
- the opinion of two musicologists, which in itself proves that Eddie has no conclusive proof. These tests were not infallible and are open to interpretation.

Also it is important to be aware that the statement was written as a result of a crisis meeting on November 9th in Miami, the day after Breaking News streamed. Before then, there had been no mention of any tests at all yet they suddenly ended up claiming on the statement that these tests had happened. Also. I don't think Jason Malachi's own recordings played any part in the tests. They did not compare the Cascio tracks to him.

Remember, when the proverbial hit the fan behind the scenes, these songs had already been bought and paid for. Sony had a vested interest in adding 12 contemporary Mj songs to their catalogue for obvious reasons.
Click to expand...


Indeed, their report is extremely vague. It's empty of any tangible info. Nowhere in any scientific domain anyone would refrain from publishing the results when the results are 100% conclusive. On the contrary, the scientific community is encouraged to publish their results, even the theoretical ones. I really don't see any harm at all that the release of such info could harm the Estate. The only harm that it could do is if the tests are NOT conclusive.
 
StellaJackson said:
Obviously if they had definitive proof they would no show it. There is nothing to suggest it is Mj on these songs.
Click to expand...

Exactly...

I don't know, it just seems the less they say, the more they're just hoping it'll 'go away'...
 
Can actually anyone give me one single good reason NOT to publish the proof that MJ is singing on those tracks?
 
If it really 100% MJ, and evidence existed the forensics wouldnt be needed. Thats my thought on it.
I want to see what will happen in Jan 2013. If something does end up happening involving the Cascio Tracks...well i hope to see new information. With New Info the Debate will be alive...more so than in the past few months....I hope


BUMPER SNIPPET said:
Can actually anyone give me one single good reason NOT to publish the proof that MJ is singing on those tracks?
Click to expand...

They are scared of people calling MJ's vocals weak...but then again one should understand its a posthumous release and this isnt Thriller. MJ can't come back to finish recording.

^ Lame. but its all i got
 
StellaJackson said:
We can only hope they have the sense not to use any more of these songs.
Click to expand...

And to repair this damage. I won't digest it till the damage hasn't been repaired by retracting those songs from the future releases and a mea culpa statement.
 
BUMPER SNIPPET said:
And to repair this damage. I won't digest it till the damage hasn't been repaired by retracting those songs from the future releases and a mea culpa statement.
Click to expand...

I think they just want to sweep it under the carpet. The only way interest would be widespread on this topic is if a leak happens.
 
Billyjeanplxiv said:
If it really 100% MJ, and evidence existed the forensics wouldnt be needed. Thats my thought on it.
I want to see what will happen in Jan 2013. If something does end up happening involving the Cascio Tracks...well i hope to see new information. With New Info the Debate will be alive...more so than in the past few months....I hope




They are scared of people calling MJ's vocals weak...but then again one should understand its a posthumous release and this isnt Thriller. MJ can't come back to finish recording.

^ Lame. but its all i got
Click to expand...

Well this isn't logical then. They release the vocals despite the fact that they themselves would consider them weak, but wouldn't show the proof that it is him?

Your suggestion is not lame, but it doesn't match with the logic of releasing those vocals.

This is serious matter, and I honestly don't see a single, not one, good reason NOT to release the proof. They contribute way more to the tarnishing of their own image by NOT releasing an authentic proof than by releasing it.

On the contrary, the only logic behind not releasing the so called "proof" is the probable fact that that very "proof" is extremely weak and that they can use it only in case they are in trouble defensively.
 
I cant think of anything. I just threw 1/2 a penny out there.


IF it is MJ and it was his vocals and they released proof....it would still be fraud due the to handling of the songs? right?
 
Billyjeanplxiv said:
I cant think of anything. I just threw 1/2 a penny out there.


IF it is MJ and it was his vocals and they released proof....it would still be fraud due the to handling of the songs? right?
Click to expand...


Well, in that case it would all depend on to what extent they fabricated the songs. Was it just speeding or slowing down the vocals with few copy pastes from previous albums, or did they build the songs word by word inserting other singers/soundalikes, James Porte's vocals etc. There is always a tolerance limit. But according to TEddy Riley's words with today's softwares "sky's the limit."
 
I mean for all we know it may not even be Jason/whoever. I bet the technology is out there to completly fabricate a voice with someone elses....or at least close enough attempt
 
Billyjeanplxiv said:
I mean for all we know it may not even be Jason/whoever. I bet the technology is out there to completly fabricate a voice with someone elses....or at least close enough attempt
Click to expand...

As far as I am concerned, in Breaking News for example, I clearly hear Jason's voice in the ad libs and a non-MJ voice in the lead vocals.
 
@bumper

calm down your anger and your tone. look to the additions and don't twist what I wrote. I wrote 3 possibilities in the last multiple posts one of which was "a fake good enough to fool everyone", it wasn't a definitive statement that I need to vouch for.

StellaJackson said:
It's my understanding that the extent of the the investigation from Sony and the Estate consisted of the following:

- two phone calls from John Branca to Thad Nauden to ask if his client was involved with the recordings.
Click to expand...

one from weitzman and one from Branca.

Also it is important to be aware that the statement was written as a result of a crisis meeting on November 9th in Miami, the day after Breaking News streamed. Before then, there had been no mention of any tests at all yet they suddenly ended up claiming on the statement that these tests had happened.
Click to expand...

It's also important to note that the phone calls to Thad Nauden is dated mid-october. Around the same time that the legit sources on this forum was mentioning a delay in the release date and Friedman was reporting 3T vocal complaints. So it's very likely that the authenticity issues started in October after the final songs started to be considered and any and all test, listening sessions, calling people happened October and November.

Also let's mention that we asked for a statement immediately after the Breaking News streaming just as we asked for a statement after we saw the Bad 25 Wembley snippet. So preparing of a statement on November 9 might be due to the fans wanting it.

Also. I don't think Jason Malachi's own recordings played any part in the tests. They did not compare the Cascio tracks to him.
Click to expand...

According to the expert Max-Jax contacted it would be leading. Same from the legal perspective.

BUMPER SNIPPET said:
Nowhere in any scientific domain anyone would refrain from publishing the results when the results are 100% conclusive.
Click to expand...

there's no such thing as 100% conclusive at a scientific domain in any regard. Paternity tests have 0.01% to 1% error rate, where as fingerprinting has 0.1% to 7.5% error rate. I'm think you would also agree that the vocal authenticity most probably has a higher level of error rate.

Billyjeanplxiv said:
IF it is MJ and it was his vocals and they released proof....it would still be fraud due the to handling of the songs? right?
Click to expand...

Don't think so. You would be buying an album with Michael Jackson vocals on it, you wouldn't be able to claim that it's a misrepresentation. Copy / paste of the adlibs is not legally an issue. and if every other additional vocal is credited by at least background vocals credit it'll be okay per Paula Abdul lawsuit example.

Fraud must be proved by showing that the defendant's actions involved five separate elements: (1) a false statement of a material fact,(2) knowledge on the part of the defendant that the statement is untrue, (3) intent on the part of the defendant to deceive the alleged victim, (4) justifiable reliance by the alleged victim on the statement, and (5) injury to the alleged victim as a result.
 
ivy said:
@bumper

calm down your anger and your tone. look to the additions and don't twist what I wrote. I wrote 3 possibilities in the last multiple posts one of which was "a fake good enough to fool everyone", it wasn't a definitive statement that I need to vouch for.
Click to expand...

I AM CALM !!!



ivy said:
According to the expert Max-Jax contacted it would be leading. Same from the legal perspective.
Click to expand...

Then it cannot be qualified as a scientific test at all. In science nothing can be leading. if it's leading, then it means that it isn't conclusive.



ivy said:
there's no such thing as 100% conclusive at a scientific domain in any regard. Paternity tests have 0.01% to 1% error rate, where as fingerprinting has 0.1% to 7.5% error rate. I'm think you would also agree that the vocal authenticity most probably has a higher level of error rate.
Click to expand...

When I said 100% conclusive I meant it as in nothing can lead or mislead the results as it is always done in any scientific field. For example the Earth is round and that's 100% conclusive despite anyone telling (leading) you that it's flat.
 
Last edited:
Bumper:


hulk1.jpg


Calm it down, yo
 
Arklove said:
Bumper:



Calm it down, yo
Click to expand...


I AM CALM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

p.s. And yet the Earth is round and nobody can lead and say it's flat sciantifically speaking (just in case you forget to focus on what has been said :D )
 
Last edited:
ivy said:
nope. The big bolded font with exclamation marks clearly show you are neither calm nor care for your tone towards me. I'm going to ignore you if you can't be civil.
Click to expand...


i am calm, it's my natural tone!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
love is magical said:
Funny how the doubters are not only illogical, unreasonable, negative, but also angry and barbaric.
Click to expand...

add dramatic to that as well.

Kidding aside : You are overly dramatic if you think something I said about Bumper's latest post which had nothing to do with his doubter position btw, applies to you doubters all. (why? why you take it personally? aren't you different and separate individuals or are you connected to each other at the hip that one thing said to another you feel it too? ) furthermore I'm quite curious of how you came to "illogical, unreasonable, negative and barbaric" from a simple "calm down you sound angry". or why do you have this need to jump into other people's discussions especially after it's over and both parties chose to ignore each other and love to restart it all over again. I thought you didn't like the main point of "who cares who did it and who knew, these songs are fake" to be lost between "not important" side topics yet you are the ones that love to post tens of no purpose posts such as "I am calm" x4.

I'll repeat this again - I know what I said very well and I know what I didn't say very well too. I'm sorry if you misunderstand stuff but seriously you are the one that's creating your own frustrations.
 
ivy said:
add dramatic to that as well.

Kidding aside : You are overly dramatic if you think something I said about Bumper's latest post which had nothing to do with his doubter position btw applies to you doubters all. (why? why you take it personally? aren't you different and separate individuals or are you connected to each other at the hip that one thing said to another you feel it too? ) furthermore I'm quite curious of how you came to "illogical, unreasonable, negative and barbaric" from a simple "calm down you sound angry". or why do you have this need to jump into other people's discussions especially after it's over and both parties chose to ignore each other and restart it all over again. I thought you didn't like the main point of "who cares who did it and who knew these songs" to be lost between "not important" side topics yet you are the ones that love to post tens of no purpose posts.

I'll repeat this again - I know what I said very well and I know what I didn't say very well too.
Click to expand...


We are one. We were born like that, it isn't our fault.

Kidding aside, I wasn't angry at all. So again we are shifting from the discussed topic to something that is unnecessary.

I'll repeat, just in case you forgot my point:

Then the forensic analysis cannot be qualified as a scientific test at all. In science nothing can be leading. if it's leading, then it means that it isn't conclusive.

When I said 100% conclusive I meant it as in nothing can lead or mislead the results as it is always done in any scientific field. For example the Earth is round and that's 100% conclusive despite anyone telling (leading) you that it's flat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top