Michael - The Great Album Debate

[elapentela]

you know what..'i feel it in my bones' does work, because Michael has sold over seven hundred million copies. the majority of people obviously go by that. you'll never see a cascio sell over seven hundred million copies. milli vanilli became a cautionary tale instead of getting that far. frauds never get very far..and what they do get, is like sand. Michael's kids are comfortable, because we could 'feel him in our bones'. Dick Clark said that of all the thousands of artists he's ever worked with Michael was the most outstanding. You would never hear a respected one like a Dick Clark say that about a fraud. emptiness begets emptiness. fullness begets fullness. so be it. choices are choices.

Michael said 'you gotta feel it'. You disagree with Dick Clark saying that? Do the rest of the believers disagree with Dick Clark on that?

Of course we feel MJ very well in Cascio songs.

 

[Snow White luvs Peter Pan]

As long as people involved in those tracks don't show us conclusives proofs they're autenthic, I'll believe these songs are as real as this trillion dollar bill. :rofl:

 

[144000]

As long as people involved in those tracks don't show us conclusives proofs they're autenthic, I'll believe these songs are as real as this trillion dollar bill. :rofl:

that looks remarkably like a Cascio. :lol:

*might as well get my money's worth*

anyway...I'm glad that i was around to see the truth about Michael. That Michael didn't need anybody's help to sing. That he sang for real, because now, people are lying all over the place. And they're lying about whether he needed help, too. Revisionist history is a b****

 

[ivy]

So, this then...

Does the Cascio singer sound just like the voice singing the 2nd verse in WBSS? Yes.

Does he sound closer to 1st link singer or 2nd link singer? 2nd link.

Those are your answers. Would have been a lot quicker if you just stated that in the first place rather than getting ultra defensive for no reason.

so would you be kind enough to tell me what is achieved here? You got an answer from kreen today too (although I'm sure you won't accept it as it's not necessarily in a yes - no format). So what did we achieve? why was the reason for all that badgering people for an answer?

 

[AlwaysThere]

We've agreed that vibrato isn't the issue.

But can Melodyne change the pronunciation of certain words?

 

[WildStyle]

so would you be kind enough to tell me what is achieved here? You got an answer from kreen today too (although I'm sure you won't accept it as it's not necessarily in a yes - no format). So what did we achieve? why was the reason for all that badgering people for an answer?

It seems that lately we discuss everything but the vocals and what we actually hear. We have vocals that we know are Michael recorded at the Cascio home studio and 12 questionable vocals supposedly recorded around the same time, in the same studio, by the same person. I've never seen a believer talk specifically about WBSS 2008 and the 12 Cascio songs and how similar/dissimilar the voices are. I simply wanted to know what the believers heard when listening to these songs. Simple answers to simple questions. It seemed to me that people were dancing around the questions and actually avoiding answering. I was also baffled that people were getting so defensive. We are here to debate. I was simply asking people what they heard and it seemed to be taken by some as a personal attack.

 

[SoCav]

@SoCav

Well it's nice to see that we agree that vibrato is not the most important thing here.

Yeah. I think the vibrato got a lot of attention initially because it is one of the strange things about the voice that is easiest to point out. I think most doubters felt that the voice overall simply did not sound like Michael, but found it hard to put into words exactly what it was that sounded 'off' to them. The vibrato is easily recognizable and therefore easy to point to. But I think that to most doubters, the vibrato is just one of the many things about the voice that is off.

there have been multiple people here that said "processing doesn't affect vibrato". The reason for the whole quotes from different sources was to show that "pitch modulation tool can alter the way the vibrato sounds". so depending on what is being done vibrato can be affected.

Okay, I think I missed or did not remember those posts then. If they mean processing in general cannot affect a vibrato, then those people are wrong. If they referred to the processing that was used/claimed to be used on the Cascio tracks, then I agree with them.

I'm also aware that the vibrato in questions isn't a wobble (slow and wide vibrato), it's tremolo which is also explained as "bleat" like which is I guess why we are seeing the mention of "goat" on this discussion. wobble quote was just added to show that external factors "lack of excitement, poor muscle tone, or fatigue" can actually affect the vibrato.

Alright, then I misunderstood you. One thing that does jump out at me though is that if we consider MJ and the factors mentioned here, I see a mismatch between this and the 'guide vocal' and 'MJ was not in great shape' explanations that have been given for the Cascio voice. These explanations suggest exactly what is mentioned here: lack of excitement, fatigue, sub-optimal preparation, etc. However, on the tracks we do not hear a vibrato that matches this. We hear the direct opposite, a very fast, goaty vibrato.

Here's my point. Teddy did say that there have been processing before what he did - pitch correction. Do we know what was done before Teddy? He also mentioned the vocals were screwed.

Well, in the interview he gave about his work on the album he said exactly what had been done to the vocals. If he was not aware of what had happened, I do not see why he would not have just said something like "the vocals were worked on before I got my hands on them, I'm not sure which tools were used on them."

As for the crappy job who did what becomes important IMO. Melodyne could be really easy, it detects all of the stuff automatically (although can have mistakes) and you can easily do a 100% automatic correction. However the results wouldn't be best. Even by a basic reading you can see the suggestions include not putting to much on Melodyne's automatic detection but check it and correct it manually, do not do 100% corrections, divide up the notes manually, and trust your ears for the best result rather than trusting Melodyne's estimations for automatic corrections. The later - manual and note by note- approach is better but it's a lot more tedious and time consuming and actually does require a certain level of skill and knowledge. An expert producer and a small time name would be different in their ability.

I see your point, but disagree for a number of reasons:
1. This is a technical point: if you apply Melodyne's automatic correction 100%, you would not get this kind of vibrato. The macro that auto-corrects in Melodyne can automatically correct the pitch center and the pitch drift. If you apply the former at 100%, it radically shifts every note the singer sang exactly to what Melodyne thinks is the correct/intended note. If you apply the latter, it tries to reduce all pitch drift. Pitch drift refers to instances where the pitch of the vocals, as the name suggests, drops up or down. This is uninentional (unlike a vibrato which is an intended, rapid fluctuation in pitch) and often the result of poor technique or difficulties singing the specific song. So the macro tries to even out these unintentional fluctuations. It should not really affect the vibrato. But even if it does, it would only reduce the vibrato (since it is trying to even out pitch fluctuations), rather than increase them.

In other words, if Eddie did the most basic and automatic form of editing you can do in Melodyne and just applied the auto-correct macro in Melodyne at 100%, it would not have led to this type of vibrato. If anything, there should be a reduced vibrato.

2. As I mentioned in my last post, if Eddie screwed up due to his lack of experience (which I still think is unlikely btw), I do not see why he could not have given the raw vocals to Teddy and the other producers. Why would he give them the screwed up vocals?

how about these ones? aren't they relevant to the speed up of the songs mentioned?

Well, maybe. I just was and am still not really sure how they are a part of the Melodyne discussion. Speeding up vocals can indeed lead to a more rapid vibrato. You are basically cramming the same vibrato in a shorter amount of time, so the fluctuations are faster than they normally were. But this of course does not match Teddy's explanation for the vibrato, which was their use of Melodyne. Also: if the vocals were greatly sped up, you would hear this in other parts of the vocal too. The vocals would start to sound unnaturally fast. I do not think this is the case for the Cascio vocals. Personally, I think the pitch of the vocals sounds shifted up a bit on a few of the songs, but not all. This would have also sped up the vocals a bit. I think this explains why the vibrato sounds even goatier on some songs than others. I do not think they were sped up all that much though. And I have tried to downpitch and reduce the speed of a few of the songs just to see what it would sound like. The voice sounds more natural (even more like Jason to me) and the vibrato still sounds very goaty.

Another thing to remember is that what is off about the vibrato is not just the speed. It is also very uncontrolled. It does not sound like the singer is really in control over the fluctuations his voice makes. They do not move nicely along with the music, but start and end very abruptly. This is exactly why the vibrato sounds a bit artificial: it is as if someone just turns on a button that makes the voice tremble along a certain pattern and then turns the button off again. If you listen to Jason's songs, you hear a similar uncontrolled vibrato.

Unfortunately I'm not that knowledgeable about music. However as I said during a brief exchange 2 years back actual and decades long musicians / producers weren't phased by any of the vibrato arguments I presented to them. Unnatural effects of processing, possible tremolo effect , a recording error (which I failed to understand) etc were all mentioned. Who knows what would a uncontrolled reverb / echo would have on the vocals - shower recording?

Well, I agree with them that the vibrato in principle could have been caused by processing, but only if someone wanted to add it to the vocals. I do not see why that would be the case here and it does not match with the explanations we have been given for the weird vibrato. As for the reverb, I do not see how it could create such a vibrato. And if the reverb was the cause, then why wouldn't we hear the weird trembling effect everywhere in the song? Why only in places where it is natural to hear a vibrato (at the end of a note/line).

Also very interestingly the one of the first things they mentioned was actually other voices being added. The Paula Abdul case (two different vocals to form a one composite lead) is actually quite common in the instances of weaker singers and the musicians has automatically assumed a similar addition was done in this instance to strengthen and fill the missing vocals - hence all the differences.

But were they mentioning this specifically with regards to the vibrato or the voice in general?

 

[StellaJackson]

The vibrato sounds the way it does because it is the natural vibrato of Jason Cupeta. Unless someone can take a previous Mj demo or any vocal by any singer for that matter, and create the same issues as the Cascio vocals, then it is the simplest, most logical answer. Unless of course, someone can identify the "processing" technique that can achieve the following..

1. A fast uncontrolled vibrato has to be added to every line of every song
2. The pronounciation of words has to be completely changed
3. The singers accent must change
4. Snorts when the singer takes a breath must be added
5. It must change the breathing technique
6. All of the above, by sheer coincidence, have to now match a different singer
7. Any trace of the original singers habits must be removed in the process
8. All the original recordings, takes, dialogue must be erased from the system
9. Any other evidence of the alleged singers involvement must be destroyed

Now that is some pretty impressive software.

 

[ivy]

see this is a nice discussion

Well, in the interview he gave about his work on the album he said exactly what had been done to the vocals. If he was not aware of what had happened, I do not see why he would not have just said something like "the vocals were worked on before I got my hands on them, I'm not sure which tools were used on them."

I was mentioning his twitter. Yeah I know that he mentioned that he did pitch correction and used melodyne etc in interviews. However on twitter he also mentioned the vocals he got was screwed and they had processing on them before he got them. I'm just saying that assuming what Teddy said is correct we don't know who did what as processing.

It's also important to remember that Teddy was brought in as a finisher shortly before the album release and he even said he only spent 2 hours on BN (I believe) so any major processing any correction should have came before his involvement I think.

People look and say what Teddy said doesn't explain the effect but they are ignoring the possibility of some other processing done by some other people before Teddy got involved.

2. As I mentioned in my last post, if Eddie screwed up due to his lack of experience (which I still think is unlikely btw), I do not see why he could not have given the raw vocals to Teddy and the other producers. Why would he give them the screwed up vocals?

I think the question becomes when the processing is done then. and if we add what Taryll said. Could they have recorded the guide vocals, corrected them and kept one guide vocals in 2007? If you approach this from music producing and if you realize that they probably had no plan to release these guide vocals and planned to record them properly in London, they had no reason to keep all the takes.

Or we can go with the "presentable songs" mention we knew. Michael never sang anything in full. before a sale they took multiple partial takes from multiple different mic recordings and cut and pasted them to come up with "complete" songs, used some sort of processing to make it flow / fit together and gave those as the vocals.

Well, maybe. I just was and am still not really sure how they are a part of the Melodyne discussion. Speeding up vocals can indeed lead to a more rapid vibrato. You are basically cramming the same vibrato in a shorter amount of time, so the fluctuations are faster than they normally were. But this of course does not match Teddy's explanation for the vibrato, which was their use of Melodyne.

I'm trying to say that there could be a bunch of different things done.

For example shower recording might have put a reverb / echo , they could have done a processing to remove the reverb but could not deal with the end of the notes/words. There could have been a second processing to speed up the vocals to fit with the new music tempo - which we heard was done for at least some songs, then the pitch correction and shift pitch up and so on.

I mean people look to one thing and say "that's not it" but what about if we combine all of the possibilities how about then?

Another thing to remember is that what is off about the vibrato is not just the speed. It is also very uncontrolled. It does not sound like the singer is really in control over the fluctuations his voice makes.

Uncontrolled reverb etc. couldn't that indeed be an effect of shower recording?

They do not move nicely along with the music, but start and end very abruptly. This is exactly why the vibrato sounds a bit artificial: it is as if someone just turns on a button that makes the voice tremble along a certain pattern and then turns the button off again. If you listen to Jason's songs, you hear a similar uncontrolled vibrato.

I actually saw that mentioned while reading yesterday that when some people do not have natural vibrato they might create it manually while recording.

As for the reverb, I do not see how it could create such a vibrato. And if the reverb was the cause, then why wouldn't we hear the weird trembling effect everywhere in the song? Why only in places where it is natural to hear a vibrato (at the end of a note/line).

they could have processed it to remove the reverb. Isn't it possible that they might have done a good job except couldn't handle or had some effects left at the end of notes / lines where the reverb was more predominant?

But were they mentioning this specifically with regards to the vibrato or the voice in general?

In general to everything. To provide some more information these were decades long musicians/sound engineers/producers. They had listened to Michael although are no where knowledgeable for a voice identification. They didn't try to do a voice identification either. I just mentioned them what was being written on the forums at that time and got their expert musician opinions in that regard. They did listen to the 3 songs briefly at that time.

There have been a focus on vibrato on this thread, according to the musicians it was inconclusive and didn't mean much. They mentioned several ways it could have been affected - not meaning that what they said was what happened here.

They did focus on production techniques and actually mentioned some stuff they did. They actually had produced 2 albums for 2 reality stars between them - imagine Kim Kardashian or Paris Hilton releasing an album. Both instances the vocalist was weak and they had used other people for composite leads (just as the Paula Abdul instance) or used multiple (a lot of) vocals to hid the vocals of the reality stars. They immediately mentioned that's what they would do and that could alone explain "do not sound like Michael"

Now if you remember that Korgnex said (and I don't know if he's right or wrong) he claimed a part that people thought was Michael/ Malachi was actually Porte. We had this other guy saying that Porte can mimic Michael and sound like him. So I think the question becomes how much of this "doesn't sound like Michael" is due to Porte?

 

[Aniram]

I don't think it really sounds like much "processing" was done to the songs except tiny studio production flair that any vocal would get.

 

[Lucilla]

Unless someone can take a previous MJ demo or any vocal by any singer for that matter, and create the same issues as the Cascio vocals, .

It would be great if someone could do this experiment, I'd love to hear the results.

 

[Aniram]

Could someone take Michael's voice and make him sound British? For example, the Cascio singer uses words differently and different technique than Michael, how could you take Michael's vocal and change his vocal technique, pronunciation, etc? It would be really magical to me to see the little foreign nuances suddenly appear. How would that even happen? I think it'd be impossible to downgrade Michael's voice that much.

 

[ivy]

just from a google search

"AV Voice Changer Software provides users with many tools. The most basic of all is a voice changer that alters the pitch and timbre of voices, resulting in a different age, sex and in this newly discovered case, even a different accent."

http://www.audio4fun.com/voice-effects-samples.htm


------

Interested in vocal synthesis, I visited Paris’s IRCAM on June 19 during a vacation in France. Xavier Rodet gave a public demonstration of vocal synthesis and transformation software they are developing which is of interest to the film industry: SuperVP-TRaX, and SuperVP-VoiceForger. Not only can they change the perceived age of a speaker by changing the frequency, resonances and timbre, e.g., make a boy sound like an infirm, old woman, but they can now impose a cultural accent on the speaker.

He played a short excerpt of an actor speaking with his Parisian accent, then Rodet turned some dials, and the actor now sounded like he had a Québecois accent.

http://thmuses.wordpress.com/2010/08/02/change-your-accent-theres-an-app-for-that/

--------------------

seems like if you alter pitch, timbre, frequency etc then the accent can also sound different.

 

[Billyjeanplxiv]

thats...interesting

 

[Chamife]

So Teddy Riley really said they screwed up the vocals? That's new to me.

And still worked on the songs religiously with pics of Michael on the wall to feel what Michael would have wanted?



Wow, just wow.

2. As I mentioned in my last post, if Eddie screwed up due to his lack of experience (which I still think is unlikely btw), I do not see why he could not have given the raw vocals to Teddy and the other producers. Why would he give them the screwed up vocals?

Pushed the delete button too soon? #righttherepushingbuttons

Sorry, couldn't help myself...

 

[AlwaysThere]

I gotta give it to Ivy -- it's apparently totally possible to change someone's voice. But the question is, why would they take Michael Jackson vocals, digitally process them to sound exactly like a relatively well-known Michael Jackson impersonator (although Malachi isn't an impersonator per se -- he just imitates Michael when singing his own songs) and release them in that state?

 

[144000]

I gotta give it to Ivy -- it's apparently totally possible to change someone's voice. But the question is, why would they take Michael Jackson vocals, digitally process them to sound exactly like a relatively well-known Michael Jackson impersonator (although Malachi isn't an impersonator per se -- he just imitates Michael when singing his own songs) and release them in that state?

lol...try to remove a soul while they're at it.

there's always something that cannot be replaced.

i feel sorry for subsequent generations.

 

[SoCav]

I'll respond to your earlier post later, ivy. I feel too tired at the moment (it's late where I am).

just from a google search

"AV Voice Changer Software provides users with many tools. The most basic of all is a voice changer that alters the pitch and timbre of voices, resulting in a different age, sex and in this newly discovered case, even a different accent."

To be honest, I think this is just marketing jibberish. If you check the examples on their website, you'll hear that it really is nothing special. They just seem to change the pitch somewhat and it does not result in a realistic voice.

Interested in vocal synthesis, I visited Paris’s IRCAM on June 19 during a vacation in France. Xavier Rodet gave a public demonstration of vocal synthesis and transformation software they are developing which is of interest to the film industry: SuperVP-TRaX, and SuperVP-VoiceForger. Not only can they change the perceived age of a speaker by changing the frequency, resonances and timbre, e.g., make a boy sound like an infirm, old woman, but they can now impose a cultural accent on the speaker.

He played a short excerpt of an actor speaking with his Parisian accent, then Rodet turned some dials, and the actor now sounded like he had a Québecois accent.

http://thmuses.wordpress.com/2010/08/02/change-your-accent-theres-an-app-for-that/

Now this one sounds interesting. I found a YouTube clip where the software is demonstrated.

[video=youtube_share;fg00-4aUcWI]http://youtu.be/fg00-4aUcWI[/video]

All we need to do now is look for the 'Maryland' dial. :lol:

Kidding aside, I did not really hear an accent or pronunciation change there. In general, although this kind of software is fun, it just leaves too many artifacts in my opinion. You can already hear them clearly in this YouTube clip, so in high quality on your headphones it would be even more apparent.

why would they take Michael Jackson vocals, digitally process them to sound exactly like a relatively well-known Michael Jackson impersonator (although Malachi isn't an impersonator per se -- he just imitates Michael when singing his own songs) and release them in that state?

That's the key thing here of course. Even if all that would be possible: why?

 

[ivy]

For the record I did not say that someone took any of the above software - or anything similar - and tried to change the voice deliberately.

However we do know that pitch modulation, any changes in speed, changes in pitch, timbre, frequency etc. can change the vibrato, youngness of the voice and even accent to a certain degree.

So it brings us back to the question of what type of processing was done by whom and if it could explain some of the issues here. For example if indeed the vocals were recorded in a shower and had a reverb/ echo on them would removing them had an effect? If the vocals were speed up / pitched up to fit a new music / tempo would that have an effect? And so on.

Also I think everyone has to accept that Malachi sounds close to Michael - not same but close. Otherwise according to doubters - he wouldn't be able to fool experts, handful or producers and a portion of fans. So here even at a regular Michael - Malachi compassion we are dealing with close sounds, subtle differences , it's not like comparing Michael to Bono for example. So in this reality the question becomes could a processing (whatever type for whatever reason) could cause this confusion?

 

[144000]

I'll respond to your earlier post later, ivy. I feel too tired at the moment (it's late where I am).


To be honest, I think this is just marketing jibberish. If you check the examples on their website, you'll hear that it really is nothing special. They just seem to change the pitch somewhat and it does not result in a realistic voice.


Now this one sounds interesting. I found a YouTube clip where the software is demonstrated.

All we need to do now is look for the 'Maryland' dial. :lol:

Kidding aside, I did not really hear an accent or pronunciation change there. In general, although this kind of software is fun, it just leaves too many artifacts in my opinion. You can already hear them clearly in this YouTube clip, so in high quality on your headphones it would be even more apparent.


That's the key thing here of course. Even if all that would be possible: why?

well..you know..replace your kids, replace your dog, wait..is that the same boss that you had yesterday..or is that an imposter? so..what is the possibly new boss' motives? i could trust my boss. wait..is that my boss? did he steal anything from me?

is this the new Motown? same as the old Motown? is this motown?

so what if your dog died. i'm replacing him with this clone. be satisfied. you'll like it, if it's the last thing you do.

 

[WildStyle]

Honestly, to me, Malachi doesn't sound close. If I had to put it into percentages, being generous, I'd say he sounds 20% like MJ. When he first emerged he did fool some people, however I could tell straight away and it wasn't hard for me to do so. I honestly think some people are better at recognizing voices than others. That's not to brag, I just think it's a fact of life.

Also, the simplest explanation is often the correct one. When we need to try to think of a thousand different possible reasons why the vocals sound like they do, it just makes the whole thing even more suspicious.

 

[Chamife]

For the record I did not say that someone took any of the above software - or anything similar - and tried to change the voice deliberately.

However we do know that pitch modulation, any changes in speed, changes in pitch, timbre, frequency etc. can change the vibrato, youngness of the voice and even accent to a certain degree.

So it brings us back to the question of what type of processing was done by whom and if it could explain some of the issues here. For example if indeed the vocals were recorded in a shower and had a reverb/ echo on them would removing them had an effect? If the vocals were speed up / pitched up to fit a new music / tempo would that have an effect? And so on.

Also I think everyone has to accept that Malachi sounds close to Michael - not same but close. Otherwise according to doubters - he wouldn't be able to fool experts, handful or producers and a portion of fans. So here even at a regular Michael - Malachi compassion we are dealing with close sounds, subtle differences , it's not like comparing Michael to Bono for example. So in this reality the question becomes could a processing (whatever type for whatever reason) could cause this confusion?

That's a good question. But then another question rises...why don't the people who are responsible for this processing come forward to explain it to us? Shouldn't be too hard and it's also a bit obligatory when you deliver tracks with an altered voice, IMO.

And about "he wouldn't be able to fool experts, handful or producers and a portion of fans" (quoting you makes it a bit easier for me.. )...we don't know if they were fooled or what they listened to. It's just guessing. One says this, the other says that..:wacko:

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

If those voice softwares were so sophisticated, then they'd be able to turn back the Cascio vocalist's voice into MJ's usual voice timbre, something we haven't witnessed yet. On the contrary, we have witnessed a voice that sounds closer to JM's than to MJ's, including all the characteristics JM does in his own songs.

And I am extremely sceptical that a software can change someone's accent. I'd like to hear the Parisian accent transformed into Quebecois. Anyone has a link?

 

[WildStyle]

If that were the case there would be artefacts galore all over the songs. There isn't. They are pretty clean recordings.

 

[SoCav]

For the record I did not say that someone took any of the above software - or anything similar - and tried to change the voice deliberately.

I know that that's not what you are saying. But I really think it is impossible to end up with the voice we hear on the tracks because of processing. Yes, there are certain elements that could potentially be added in, such as a shaky vibrato, but only if they were done deliberately: you do not just end up with a vibrato like that as a side-effect from minor tweaking to something else, like the pitch or the tempo of the track. Loads of processing would always lead to lots of artifacts on the vocal tracks: the Casco vocals sound pretty clean.

For example if indeed the vocals were recorded in a shower and had a reverb/ echo on them would removing them had an effect?

I did not respond to this one yet. I do not think this is possible either. As far as I know there are ways to reduce reverb to some extent. You can use gate plugins and I think there are also specific plug-in's aimed at getting rid of reverb. But it is very difficult to do and can very easily lead to choppiness/clicking on the track (again, the Cascio tracks sound rather clean). Also, it would affect the whole track, not just some notes where we hear a vibrato now.

Also I think everyone has to accept that Malachi sounds close to Michael - not same but close. Otherwise according to doubters - he wouldn't be able to fool experts, handful or producers and a portion of fans. So here even at a regular Michael - Malachi compassion we are dealing with close sounds, subtle differences , it's not like comparing Michael to Bono for example. So in this reality the question becomes could a processing (whatever type for whatever reason) could cause this confusion?

But that's why it feels to us like we're in the Twilight Zone, ivy. I totally agree with WildStyle. Okay, it's not like comparing Michael to Bono, but the voices still sound very different. I have never heard a part of a JM song that really made me feel like it could be Michael. He's always just sounded like this much weaker and younger singer trying to sing in Michael's style.

 

[WildStyle]

To me the Cascio songs vocals sound cleaner than Michael's vocals on WBSS 2008. Anyone else hear that?

 

[AlwaysThere]

To me the Cascio songs vocals sound cleaner than Michael's vocals on WBSS 2008. Anyone else hear that?

I did! It's hard to explain what I heard though; the Cascio tracks and the WBSS 2008 vocals sound like they were recorded with two different microphones -- like you said, the Cascios sound a little cleaner/at more of a professional level.

 

[WildStyle]

It does sound distinctively more lo-fi.

Possible explanations.

1. WBSS 2008 vocal is more processed than the 12 Cascio tracks.

2. Eddie upgraded his studio equipment. Either right after recording WBSS 2008 (and not bothering to re-record it with the better equipment for some reason) or in the years after.

3. The 12 Cascio songs were recorded somewhere else.

With regards to Malachi - at times there are similarities between his voice and Michael's. I think we all hear where the similarities are. I think what separated those that believed it was Michael when we first heard JM and those that didn't, is that some are better at recognizing the differences. And they are vast IMO.

 

[144000]

It does sound distinctively more lo-fi.

Possible explanations.

1. WBSS 2008 vocal is more processed than the 12 Cascio tracks.

2. Eddie upgraded his studio equipment.

3. The 12 Cascio songs were recorded somewhere else.

With regards to Malachi - at times there are similarities between his voice and Michael's. I think we all hear where the similarities are. I think what separated those that believed it was Michael when we first heard JM and those that didn't, is that some are better at recognizing the differences. And they are vast IMO.

i don't hear any similarities between Jason Malachi and Michael Jackson.
nor do i hear anything that sounds as clean as Michael does, unenhanced.

There are stories that have been told, all over this site about MJ fans getting ripped off by all kinds of people selling things 'musics' 'mixes' with Michael Jackson's name on them.. and that's why this is all so sad.

 

[WildStyle]

Mamacita is the closest he's ever come to sounding close to Michael, and even then it's only certain phrases. He can only handle it in a certain register and mouthing certain phrases. Like when he is singing the "or" parts in Mamacita. That is the only time I've ever thought he sounded close to Michael. But the rest of the song gives him away because he simply isn't a very good singer. The rest of the song he just sounds like a kid trying to sound like MJ. The tone, timbre, range, accent, skill, experience and technique are all vastly different to Michael's. Bascically he sounds like a completely different person to MJ because... well... he is lol.