Michael - The Great Album Debate

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

Here's something I'd like to ask the believers. Let's assume that a highly sophisticated voice software had been used capable to change the singer's accent, pronunciation, timbre, vibrato and many other things which we hear on the Cascio tracks.

Vocally speaking, my question is, why do believers find it more plausible to believe that Michael Jackson recorded those songs to which someone in the studio decided to change so many different parameters to the voice like adding exaggerated vibrato, removing "t" in the middle of the words, transforming the voice into another accent (for example the pronunciation of "stalking" vs "stocking"), etc. in all the 12 songs

than

to believe that a soundalike sang those songs to which --thanks to that highly sophisticated voice software-- someone tried to transform the voice timbre the closest possible to match Michael's voice timbre without being careful enough (or simply without being aware enough) to fully remove the singer's local accent, yet thinking that by adding MJ's breaths from previous songs would solve the problem?


p.s. And in advance I'll answer Kreen's argument: no, Kreen, I am not making up the singer's accent. The singer clearly omits his "t" in the words such as "waiting". The singer clearly pronounces "stocking" instead of "stalking" and the singer clearly has a faster vibrato than MJ's usual vibrato. Those are facts and not my imagination. Phonetics.

p.p.s. And if there are some respectable audio/voice forensics around, I'd be honored to have their view on the posed question. For that matter I'd suggest them to listen to the song "Stay"and especially to pay attention from 1min08s to 1min10s for the starters and explain the phenomenon.

 

[Aniram]

^

 

[kreen]

Vocally speaking, my question is, why do believers find it more plausible to believe that Michael Jackson recorded those songs to which someone in the studio decided to change so many different parameters to the voice like adding exaggerated vibrato, removing "t" in the middle of the words, transforming the voice into another accent (for example the pronunciation of "stalking" vs "stocking"), etc. in all the 12 songs

than

to believe that a soundalike sang those songs to which --thanks to that highly sophisticated voice software-- someone tried to transform the voice timbre the closest possible to match Michael's voice timbre without being careful enough (or simply without being aware enough) to fully remove the singer's local accent, yet thinking that by adding MJ's breaths from previous songs would solve the problem?


.

Because neither of those two options is what we think happened. Eddie Cascio/James Porte did not set out to remove « t’s » or change accents. And up until now, doubters never claimed that software was used to turn Malachi’s vocals into something more resembling MJ’s : they always claimed it was « pure » Malachi, and in fact sounded « nothing like » MJ.

Regarding your first option, the vibrato can now be explained as being an artefact of digital manipulation of the vocals. Thanks to Ivy for doing that research, and shame on all of us for not doing it ourselves : we had two years to do it, but we chose to bicker amongst us instead.

Teddy Riley’s early tweet on the “f*****g Cascios” who ruined MJ’s vocals is especially telling because it was made very early in the controversy – it can thus be seen as reflecting Teddy’s initial feeling about the vocals, which that they sure were MJ, but Eddie Cascio – an amateur – had screwed them up.

Eddie wouldn’t be the first person in art history to, through incompetence, unchecked enthusiasm or unwarranted self-confidence, partially destroy what he was supposed to make better. So that takes care of the vibrato.

The pronunciation and accent thing can be similarly explained by something we’ve known from day one : James Porte is all over those tracks. Korgnex and Angelo Montrone have confirmed that James Porte can sound a lot like MJ. His voice may be there doubling MJ’s or he may be singing parts we assumed were MJ’s (or Malachi’s).

Add to this the fact that for whatever reason, MJ may have sung some words in a way he didn’t usually sing them. I’ll point to you the instance of the word “lost”, being sung is a weird, almost British way in “You are my life”. I’ll also mention – and I hope I won’t be BANNED for pointing this out – that MJ’s health may have influenced his singing. I mean, we all remember his frozen upper lip from 2001, and his weirdly low voice at the beginning of the TII press conference. But suffice it to say that whatever subtle differences in accent and pronunciations exist can be mostly attributed to James Porte.

So, even from an internal analysis of the songs, the idea that an impersonator was hired is unlikely. And when we add the external side of the analysis, on which I’ve always focused – the fact that the Jacksons haven’t sued, that the secret of the hoax hasn’t been revealed by any of the numerous people who must be aware of it, that the psychological profile of the conspirators and their supporters is illogical, that the Estate stands by the songs, etc. – it becomes almost impossible to hold to the idea that an impersonator was hired.

 

[SoCav]

Because neither of those two options is what we think happened. Eddie Cascio/James Porte did not set out to remove « t’s » or change accents. And up until now, doubters never claimed that software was used to turn Malachi’s vocals into something more resembling MJ’s : they always claimed it was « pure » Malachi, and in fact sounded « nothing like » MJ.

The point that has been discussed over the past couple of pages is that it is MJ but that because of processing, he might resemble Malachi more. This is something that has been posited by believers, not doubters.

Regarding your first option, the vibrato can now be explained as being an artefact of digital manipulation of the vocals. Thanks to Ivy for doing that research, and shame on all of us for not doing it ourselves : we had two years to do it, but we chose to bicker amongst us instead.

You do not even read what's being discussed here. And then you accuse doubters of just picking whatever fits their theory and running with it. Unbelievable.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

Because neither of those two options is what we think happened. Eddie Cascio/James Porte did not set out to remove « t’s » or change accents. And up until now, doubters never claimed that software was used to turn Malachi’s vocals into something more resembling MJ’s : they always claimed it was « pure » Malachi, and in fact sounded « nothing like » MJ.

I was speaking hypothetically. If a voice software had been used and caused all kinds of voice distortions, then they would have been obliged to dramatically change all MJ's voice characteristics in order to obtain the result we hear.

Regarding your first option, the vibrato can now be explained as being an artefact of digital manipulation of the vocals. Thanks to Ivy for doing that research, and shame on all of us for not doing it ourselves : we had two years to do it, but we chose to bicker amongst us instead.

You obviously haven't read all the posts, so you can't say what had already been said or not about the vibrato and various softwares.

Teddy Riley’s early tweet on the “f*****g Cascios” who ruined MJ’s vocals is especially telling because it was made very early in the controversy – it can thus be seen as reflecting Teddy’s initial feeling about the vocals, which that they sure were MJ, but Eddie Cascio – an amateur – had screwed them up.

Irrelevant argument regarding my question. By the way, Teddy when he went on Oprah didn't provide us with any explanation whatsoever. he just said it's Michael. Well duh, how does he know that?

Eddie wouldn’t be the first person in art history to, through incompetence, unchecked enthusiasm or unwarranted self-confidence, partially destroy what he was supposed to make better. So that takes care of the vibrato.

And what was Michael doing then? He supposedly let Eddie manage the whole thing and didn't have his say?

The pronunciation and accent thing can be similarly explained by something we’ve known from day one : James Porte is all over those tracks. Korgnex and Angelo Montrone have confirmed that James Porte can sound a lot like MJ. His voice may be there doubling MJ’s or he may be singing parts we assumed were MJ’s (or Malachi’s).

So, when the accent is different, it's James Porte? How convenient. The problem is that the accent is noticed on the lead vocal all over the song. But, neither Korgnex nor Montrone have explained how come that throughout the whole song the same voice timbre (supposedly MJ) had that accent. Nor did anyone point out at what precise time James Porte supposedly sings as a lead vocalist.

to this the fact that for whatever reason, MJ may have sung some words in a way he didn’t usually sing them. I’ll point to you the instance of the word “lost”, being sung is a weird, almost British way in “You are my life”. I’ll also mention – and I hope I won’t be BANNED for pointing this out – that MJ’s health may have influenced his singing. I mean, we all remember his frozen upper lip from 2001, and his weirdly low voice at the beginning of the TII press conference. But suffice it to say that whatever subtle differences in accent and pronunciations exist can be mostly attributed to James Porte.

Being a linguist myself, your explanation does not convince me. The accent doesn't change because you are not in shape. And the "whatever" reason is not any kind of explanation. For example, I live near Brussels, I am not going all of sudden to have a typical accent from Paris because I am not in shape. This is just not how the things work in linguistics and phonetics.

, even from an internal analysis of the songs, the idea that an impersonator was hired is unlikely. And when we add the external side of the analysis, on which I’ve always focused – the fact that the Jacksons haven’t sued, that the secret of the hoax hasn’t been revealed by any of the numerous people who must be aware of it, that the psychological profile of the conspirators and their supporters is illogical, that the Estate stands by the songs, etc. – it becomes almost impossible to hold to the idea that an impersonator was hired.

No matter how logical or illogical any theory may sound, the point is: there is a complete lack of transparency and the reasons behind why this lack of transparency has been maintained were all made up by the believers given the fact that they don't know more than us, doubters.

 

[Pentum]

New potential copy paste ad libs:

http://soundcloud.com/pentum/ooh-ooh

This one is a bit hard. They DO sound a bit different, but there's a lot of reverb in Thriller.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

New potential copy paste ad libs:

http://soundcloud.com/pentum/ooh-ooh

This one is a bit hard. They DO sound a bit different, but there's a lot of reverb in Thriller.

On Monster? These two "oohs" do seem to come from the same song (Thriller).

 

[Pentum]

It's not Monster. First one is from B2N, second one is from Thriller.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

It's not Monster. First one is from B2N, second one is from Thriller.

To me they both sound coming from Thriller.

 

[Pentum]

Yes, that's why I am posting it, it sounds like the one in B2N is copy-pasted from Thriller acappella. I myself is not 100% sure though, there is a little difference.

 

[AlwaysThere]

I’ll also mention – and I hope I won’t be BANNED for pointing this out – that MJ’s health may have influenced his singing. I mean, we all remember his frozen upper lip from 2001, and his weirdly low voice at the beginning of the TII press conference. But suffice it to say that whatever subtle differences in accent and pronunciations exist can be mostly attributed to James Porte.

So his upper lip caused the weird pronunciation in the twelve Cascio demos, but not in Hold My Hand, which was recorded the same year?

Another question to ask you, kreen, that I don't think has been asked yet. You say that the Cascio demos are simply guide vocals by Michael (and apparently James Porte, who was not given any lead vocal credit) that were meant to be recorded fully in London. We have plenty of songs with guide vocals -- Beautiful Girl, In the Back, etc. You can note that Michael will often mumble through sections and never sang to his full ability. So why, for the twelve Cascio demos, EVERY single lyric is sung, ad-libs are completed and background vocals are fully recorded? Sure, the backgrounds could have been done after Michael's death, but the other two factors can't be ignored. Michael never did anything like that regarding guide vocals. Why start now?

Also, whether you truly believe Michael is singing on the tracks or not, you cannot deny that some of the evidence raised by fans raises suspicion. For instance, Eddie said that he deleted the vocal outtakes, as he needed space on his hard drive. There are so many problems with that statement in itself. Why not back the outtakes up to a CD or something of the sorts? Why not delete other unneeded documents, music or photo files? Not to mention that Birchey claims to have seen a photo of a Pro Tools session from 2010 that show each line of the a cappella vocals split between multiple different vocal takes. If Birchey was telling the truth, that means they do have access to unheard vocals, which Eddie said didn't exist.

So either Eddie's stupid or he's lying. I vote both.

 

[kreen]

So his upper lip caused the weird pronunciation in the twelve Cascio demos, but not in Hold My Hand, which was recorded the same year?

Another question to ask you, kreen, that I don't think has been asked yet. You say that the Cascio demos are simply guide vocals by Michael (and apparently James Porte, who was not given any lead vocal credit) that were meant to be recorded fully in London. We have plenty of songs with guide vocals -- Beautiful Girl, In the Back, etc. You can note that Michael will often mumble through sections and never sang to his full ability. So why, for the twelve Cascio demos, EVERY single lyric is sung, ad-libs are completed and background vocals are fully recorded? Sure, the backgrounds could have been done after Michael's death, but the other two factors can't be ignored. Michael never did anything like that regarding guide vocals. Why start now?

Also, whether you truly believe Michael is singing on the tracks or not, you cannot deny that some of the evidence raised by fans raises suspicion. For instance, Eddie said that he deleted the vocal outtakes, as he needed space on his hard drive. There are so many problems with that statement in itself. Why not back the outtakes up to a CD or something of the sorts? Why not delete other unneeded documents, music or photo files? Not to mention that Birchey claims to have seen a photo of a Pro Tools session from 2010 that show each line of the a cappella vocals split between multiple different vocal takes. If Birchey was telling the truth, that means they do have access to unheard vocals, which Eddie said didn't exist.

So either Eddie's stupid or he's lying. I vote both.

Why are there complete lead vocals for the Cascio songs, while lyrics for songs like Hollywood Tonight, In the Back or Beautiful Girl are mumbled or half-sung? Because the Cascio songs were already written when MJ laid down his vocals for them. Roger Friedman had heard some of those songs a couple of years before MJ worked on them: they were songs Eddie and James wrote for the latter, who was then trying to launch his own singing career. “Soldier Boy” was actually registered in 2005, unless I’m mistaken. Maybe MJ contributed to some of the songs, like BN or KYHU, but it’s safe to assume most of those songs existed with complete lyrics when MJ worked with Eddie in 2007. That’s unlike MJ’s own self-written material, where he often writes his lyrics at the last minute.

Besides, it’s actually unclear just how complete those lead vocals were (Are some verses repeated? Are some choruses completely “MJ-less”? Is it actually Porte on some parts where, like you said, MJ was maybe just mumbling or going “da-da-da”?). It’s hard to tell.

As for Eddie saying he deleted the original vocals on his hard drive, that’s obviously a lie – if he did say it – to Taryll Jackson, whom Eddie hates, and who hates Eddie back. The idea Eddie Cascio feels he owes the truth – or indeed whatever else – to any of his adversaries in MJ’s extended family is pretty absurd. What’s much more decisive, in this issue, is that if Tarryll was so confident Eddie had nothing to back up his claim – having stupidly deleted all evidence – the Jacksons would have sued a long time ago already.

Speaking of Tarryll, what did he say when he was asked about the controversy during his Q&A with this very board?
One last point : some have said I didn’t read the previous posts on MJ’s vibrato. I did read them, but I did exaggerate when I said “it proves the vibrato is an artifact from vocal manipulation”. What I should have said was that this recent research and discussion indicates that the 100% certainty with which some doubters have asserted for 2 years that “nothing could produce such a vibrato – so it must be Malachi” has been grossly overestimated.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

Why are there complete lead vocals for the Cascio songs, while lyrics for songs like Hollywood Tonight, In the Back or Beautiful Girl are mumbled or half-sung? Because the Cascio songs were already written when MJ laid down his vocals for them. Roger Friedman had heard some of those songs a couple of years before MJ worked on them: they were songs Eddie and James wrote for the latter, who was then trying to launch his own singing career. “Soldier Boy” was actually registered in 2005, unless I’m mistaken. Maybe MJ contributed to some of the songs, like BN or KYHU, but it’s safe to assume most of those songs existed with complete lyrics when MJ worked with Eddie in 2007. That’s unlike MJ’s own self-written material, where he often writes his lyrics at the last minute.

Besides, it’s actually unclear just how complete those lead vocals were (Are some verses repeated? Are some choruses completely “MJ-less”? Is it actually Porte on some parts where, like you said, MJ was maybe just mumbling or going “da-da-da”?). It’s hard to tell.

As for Eddie saying he deleted the original vocals on his hard drive, that’s obviously a lie – if he did say it – to Taryll Jackson, whom Eddie hates, and who hates Eddie back. The idea Eddie Cascio feels he owes the truth – or indeed whatever else – to any of his adversaries in MJ’s extended family is pretty absurd. What’s much more decisive, in this issue, is that if Tarryll was so confident Eddie had nothing to back up his claim – having stupidly deleted all evidence – the Jacksons would have sued a long time ago already.

Speaking of Tarryll, what did he say when he was asked about the controversy during his Q&A with this very board?
One last point : some have said I didn’t read the previous posts on MJ’s vibrato. I did read them, but I did exaggerate when I said “it proves the vibrato is an artifact from vocal manipulation”. What I should have said was that this recent research and discussion indicates that the 100% certainty with which some doubters have asserted for 2 years that “nothing could produce such a vibrato – so it must be Malachi” has been grossly overestimated.

You see, the problem is this line. The lead voice sounds the same from the beginning till the end of the song. The problem of that lead voice is that the accent does not match Michael's. Now, if you can't tell the difference between James's and Michael's voice, then James could have sung entirely from the beginning till the end. If not, then you'd be able to point out at what precise moment James Porte sings as the lead vocalist.

 

[kreen]

You see, the problem is this line. The lead voice sounds the same from the beginning till the end of the song. The problem of that lead voice is that the accent does not match to Michael's. Now, if you can't tell the difference between James's and Michael's voice, then James could have sung entirely from the beginning till the end. If not, then you'd be able to point out at what precise moment James Porte sings as the lead vocalist.

But when you say "the accent doesn't match", where precisely do you feel that is the case? On some words? On all the words? On the 3 released songs? On all 12 songs?

When you consider that Porte’s voice could actually be doubling MJ’s throughout whole songs, that Porte is supposedly pretty good at copying MJ’s voice, and that we don’t know what sort of processing Eddie did on the vocals in the first place, I for one admit – and I have no no shame about that – that in those circumstances, I couldn’t tell with 100 % certainty « where MJ ends and where Porte begins ». Like on that « too bad » line in Monster : if you’d asked me before Korgnex said anything if that could be MJ, I would have said, « sure ».

On a related subject, I was listening to « For All Time » today. Is MJ actually supposed to be singing on the new bridge that was added for Thriller 25? Cause if he’s there, he sounds pretty low in the mix, or something was done to his voice. Isn’t that bridge supposed to have been recorded at the Cascios’?

 

[Pentum]

There are multiple voices in the bridge for the new FAT, but I do believe I hear MJ in it. At least 1 MJ

 

[144000]

Because neither of those two options is what we think happened. Eddie Cascio/James Porte did not set out to remove « t’s » or change accents. And up until now, doubters never claimed that software was used to turn Malachi’s vocals into something more resembling MJ’s : they always claimed it was « pure » Malachi, and in fact sounded « nothing like » MJ.

Regarding your first option, the vibrato can now be explained as being an artefact of digital manipulation of the vocals. Thanks to Ivy for doing that research, and shame on all of us for not doing it ourselves : we had two years to do it, but we chose to bicker amongst us instead.

Teddy Riley’s early tweet on the “f*****g Cascios” who ruined MJ’s vocals is especially telling because it was made very early in the controversy – it can thus be seen as reflecting Teddy’s initial feeling about the vocals, which that they sure were MJ, but Eddie Cascio – an amateur – had screwed them up.

Eddie wouldn’t be the first person in art history to, through incompetence, unchecked enthusiasm or unwarranted self-confidence, partially destroy what he was supposed to make better. So that takes care of the vibrato.

The pronunciation and accent thing can be similarly explained by something we’ve known from day one : James Porte is all over those tracks. Korgnex and Angelo Montrone have confirmed that James Porte can sound a lot like MJ. His voice may be there doubling MJ’s or he may be singing parts we assumed were MJ’s (or Malachi’s).

Add to this the fact that for whatever reason, MJ may have sung some words in a way he didn’t usually sing them. I’ll point to you the instance of the word “lost”, being sung is a weird, almost British way in “You are my life”. I’ll also mention – and I hope I won’t be BANNED for pointing this out – that MJ’s health may have influenced his singing. I mean, we all remember his frozen upper lip from 2001, and his weirdly low voice at the beginning of the TII press conference. But suffice it to say that whatever subtle differences in accent and pronunciations exist can be mostly attributed to James Porte.

So, even from an internal analysis of the songs, the idea that an impersonator was hired is unlikely. And when we add the external side of the analysis, on which I’ve always focused – the fact that the Jacksons haven’t sued, that the secret of the hoax hasn’t been revealed by any of the numerous people who must be aware of it, that the psychological profile of the conspirators and their supporters is illogical, that the Estate stands by the songs, etc. – it becomes almost impossible to hold to the idea that an impersonator was hired.

How do you know that what i bolded isn't Teddy Riley saying Cascios substituting a vocal to try to sound like MJ as opposed to a Cascio taking actual MJ vocals and misusing them. You put a lot into a short Teddy Riley sentence. Nobody is sure about the inflections of Teddy's sentences, except Teddy. You're just guessing on that by using the underlined word 'can'. Here you are saying you're so sure of your position, yet you use words like 'can'..which is the same as using the word 'maybe'. the words 'certain' and 'maybe' don't mean the same thing. So your entire position that you were saying all along that you wanted to convince me that you're certain, is based on a 'maybe'.

Plus, you're admitting that it's(the vocal is) messed up, whatever it is, and then you go on to try and reverse your statement by saying these were supposed tendencies of MJ, himself.
Quicksand still isn't safe to stand on.

And why are you bringing up songs such as 'For All Time'? Looking all over MJ's catalogue, this hard for him to resemble a Cascio work is an irrelevant thing to do, for, if someone wants to work that hard to find something, then their ears will give them what they want, even if it's not there. That's why critics are always wrong when critiquing songs that they think will be hits. They work to hard to find wrong in what isn't wrong, and right in what isn't right.

'For All Time' is all Michael Jackson.

For All Time was put out, when Michael was here. The fact that everybody changes when it comes to death, will be a cloud over everything released since the 'Michael' album...especially with the Michael album. There's always room for suspicion, when Michael is not in the room. It would be a lie to not think that there are people who take advantage of the fact that somebody died to do what they would not do if the person was still here. It happens way too often.

I will admit, however, that you did admit that you guessed about some things in some areas, and were not sure.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

But when you say "the accent doesn't match", where precisely do you feel that is the case? On some words? On all the words? On the 3 released songs? On all 12 songs?

When you consider that Porte’s voice could actually be doubling MJ’s throughout whole songs, that Porte is supposedly pretty good at copying MJ’s voice, and that we don’t know what sort of processing Eddie did on the vocals in the first place, I for one admit – and I have no no shame about that – that in those circumstances, I couldn’t tell with 100 % certainty « where MJ ends and where Porte begins ». Like on that « too bad » line in Monster : if you’d asked me before Korgnex said anything if that could be MJ, I would have said, « sure ».

On a related subject, I was listening to « For All Time » today. Is MJ actually supposed to be singing on the new bridge that was added for Thriller 25? Cause if he’s there, he sounds pretty low in the mix, or something was done to his voice. Isn’t that bridge supposed to have been recorded at the Cascios’?

Well, do you need Korgnex to tell you when you hear your idol? You change your mind because Korgnex told you and you forget what you hear with your own ears? And if it is so hard to tell the difference between James and Michael, then James could have sung the whole song.

Regarding the accent, as I said, it is the same voice timbre all over the lead vocals. So when that voice pronounces some words, they don't match the accent from any other Michael's song.

 

[ivy]

@bumper

if we are talking about a composite lead it would be impossible to divide the parts between the vocals. they would be mixed + combined to form the composite leads. The goal is to make it sound like one person, not two obvious leads.

for example let's look to the example

In this Paula Abdul song the lead vocals are a composite lead of Paula Abdul and Yvette Marine. Do you hear two people on the leads? Not the backgrounds multiple people are on the backvocals and credited separately (such as David Cochran)

This one also has composite leads of Paula Abdul and Yvette Marine

It's a duet with "The wild pair". The background vocals are done by Patti Brooks.

Note : of course Paula Abdul. Babyface etc. are also on the back vocals

 

[eXceLOfFam1]

@bumper

if we are talking about a composite lead it would be impossible to divide the parts between the vocals. they would be mixed + combined to form the composite leads. The goal is to make it sound like one person, not two obvious leads.

for example let's look to the example

In this Paula Abdul song the lead vocals are a composite lead of Paula Abdul and Yvette Marine. Do you hear two people on the leads? Not the backgrounds multiple people are on the backvocals and credited separately (such as David Cochran)

This one also has composite leads of Paula Abdul and Yvette Marine

It's a duet with "The wild pair". The background vocals are done by Patti Brooks.

Note : of course Paula Abdul. Babyface etc. are also on the back vocals

I for one can hear the two different voices, 2 different voices will never mix perfectly no matter what voices they are

 

[ivy]

I for one can hear the two different voices, 2 different voices will never mix perfectly no matter what voices they are

are the two vocals on equal levels?

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

@bumper

if we are talking about a composite lead it would be impossible to divide the parts between the vocals. they would be mixed + combined to form the composite leads. The goal is to make it sound like one person, not two obvious leads.

Are you saying that on all 12 Cascio tracks we hear James+Michael blended into one voice without Eddie, the Estate or SONY informing anyone about it and without knowing the portion that MJ suppsoedly sings and the amount James sings? And if that's teh case, do we have to accept such songs as being Michael's?

 

[ivy]

Are you saying that on all 12 Cascio tracks we hear James+Michael blended into one voice without Eddie, the Estate or SONY informing anyone about it and without knowing the portion that MJ suppsoedly sings and the amount James sings? And if that's teh case, do we have to accept such songs as being Michael's?

Listen to the above examples. In "I need you" full guide vocals of Yvette Marine is mixed with full vocals of Paula Abdul to form the full lead vocals.

Is that a Paula Abdul song? Yes it is because she's singing the full song
Is it also fully enhanced with a second vocal ? Yes it is.
Is the second vocal credited? Yes as a background vocal because Paula Abdul's vocals are the predominant one and Yvette's vocals is mixed down.
Is it legal? Yes totally.

(I'm not sure about the percentage, if full or partial, in opposites attract)

-----------

Edited to add

For the record I'm not saying anything about the Cascio songs.

A composite vocal is supposed to sound like one person not two people dueting. Therefore one person will be predominant and the second vocal will be mixed down (-5, -6 Db - if my memory isn't failing me) to be not obvious. It's meaningless to ask "where do you hear the second person?" because you aren't supposed to be able to identify the second vocal. A composite lead can be done on the full songs (Paula Abdul example) or it could be partially / done on certain parts ( Paul McCartney recording problematic parts of John Lennon vocals).

 

[WildStyle]

Just listening on laptop speakers with a lot of noise going on in the background and on "I Need You" at 1.16 I can hear the 2 different voices. I believe Abdul sings "At the start" and another voice comes in with "couldn't say". This is the 3rd Paula Abdul song I've ever heard in my life.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

Listen to the above examples. In "I need you" full guide vocals of Yvette Marine is mixed with full vocals of Paula Abdul to form the full lead vocals.

Is that a Paula Abdul song? Yes it is because she's singing the full song
Is it also fully enhanced with a second vocal ? Yes it is.
Is the second vocal credited? Yes as a background vocal because Paula Abdul's vocals are the predominant one and Yvette's vocals is mixed down.
Is it legal? Yes totally.

(I'm not sure about the percentage, if full or partial, in opposites attract)

-----------

Edited to add

For the record I'm not saying anything about the Cascio songs.

A composite vocal is supposed to sound like one person not two people dueting. Therefore one person will be predominant and the second vocal will be mixed down (-5, -6 Db - if my memory isn't failing me) to be not obvious. It's meaningless to ask "where do you hear the second person?" because you aren't supposed to be able to identify the second vocal. A composite lead can be done on the full songs (Paula Abdul example) or it could be partially / done on certain parts ( Paul McCartney recording problematic parts of John Lennon vocals).

What Paula Abdul decided to do with her team is irrelevant to our issue here simply because whatever she did to her lead vocals she did it being alive and she released the songs with her approval.

Now, in our case, in this very thread, if your theory is correct, that is to say that two voices (MJ's and James's) had been merged into one unique voice as a lead vooice on the Cascio tracks, then we are facing more than one huge dilemma.

The first and biggest dilemma is the fact that Michael Jackson is unable to voice his opinion or to give his side of the story given the fact that he's dead.

The second dilemma is the impossibility to say how much of Michael's vocals have been used and how much of James's. In other words, if James is much more present on those tracks than Michael, then they could be labeled as James's songs as well.

The third dilemma is the fact that nobody has been informed about whether actually those techniques have been used at all or not. All we know is that Eddie said that Michael Jackson was ready, that they recorded those songs and that he would have released them.

The fourth and last dilemma -also maybe the most important actually- is if they actually used this merging two voices into one technique, we have no clue whether Michael sang anything at all for those tracks or whether they took Michael Jackson's vocals from other songs (from previous releases) which they copied and arranged to match the melody of the tracks and blended into James's voice who specifically sang for those songs in order to fabricate those new songs. When it comes to the studio recording and manipulations, to quote Teddy "sky's the limit".

p.s. I'd also like to add that in the '90s, if I remember correctly, my teacher of physics told me that merging two voices into one and make it sound like one unique voice was impossible. As I see some members hearing two distinct voices on Paula Abdul's song, it just doesn't surprise me, it reminds me of what my teacher in physics told us at school.

 

[144000]

What Paula Abdul decided to do with her team is irrelevant to our issue here simply because whatever she did to her lead vocals she did it being alive and she released the songs with her approval.

Now, in our case, in this very thread, if your theory is correct, that is to say that two voices (MJ's and James's) had been merged into one unique voice as a lead vooice on the Cascio tracks, then we are facing more than one huge dilemma.

The first and biggest dilemma is the fact that Michael Jackson is unable to voice his opinion or to give his side of the story given the fact that he's dead.

The second dilemma is the impossibility to say how much of Michael's vocals have been used and how much of James's. In other words, if James is much more present on those tracks than Michael, then they could be labeled as James's songs as well.

The third dilemma is the fact that nobody has been informed about whether actually those techniques have been used at all or not. All we know is that Eddie said that Michael Jackson was ready, that they recorded those songs and that he would have released them.

The fourth and last dilemma -also maybe the most important actually- is if they actually used this merging two voices into one technique, we have no clue whether Michael sang anything at all for those tracks or whether they took Michael Jackson's vocals from other songs (from previous releases) which they copied and arranged to match the melody of the tracks and blended into James's voice who specifically sang for those songs in order to fabricate those new songs. When it comes to the studio recording and manipulations, to quote Teddy "sky's the limit".

p.s. I'd also like to add that in the '90s, if I remember correctly, my teacher of physics told me that merging two voices into one and make it sound like one unique voice was impossible. As I see some members hearing two distinct voices on Paula Abdul's song, it just doesn't surprise me, it reminds me of what my teacher in physics told us at school.

Could you turn the bolded part into spam for me, please? i never get tired of seeing that. some truths are worth repeating.

 

[kreen]

I'd like to talk some more about the bridge on "For All Time" and the MJ vocals on WBSS 2008. I didn't much come on MJ forums during the Thriller 25 era so I missed most of the discussions that went on at that time.

Regarding the "For All Time" bridge : is it supposed to have been recorded at the Cascios'?

Regarding the WBSS 2008 MJ vocals : I remember some people being uncertain as to whether those vocals were new, or taken from one of the WBSS demos from 1982. Are we positive now that MJ sang new vocals for WBSS 2008?

 

[144000]

i'm positive that Michael supervised everything that happened with For All Time, and For All Time is a much older song than 2008..it's from the Thriller era. and..'supposed to be' would amount to a rumor. I don't listen to WBSS 2008, because I don't like that version, so I can't comment on it. But hoping for a rumor about recording at the Cascios to be true won't get anywhere at this time. Michael's not here to tell us the truth, and we're left to anyone else's guess, which means nothing, and can't tell us anything about whether Michael had a good relationship with the Cascios or not at that time in 2008. Michael's not here to tell us the truth on that, either, so a discussion on that would be pointless.

I can tell you that For All Time is a song I love very much, and throughout the song, there are similarities to a song from his Ultimate Collection boxset, that is from the movie 'ET', as far as his vocals are concerned, and 'Don't Walk Away' from Invincible. His ability to 'go low' is very identifiable. It's nothing new that he could reach low notes that way. All those sounds I've mentioned, from the ET song, Don't Walk Away, and For All Time, are absolute Michael..and with the exception of Don't Walk Away, all those sounds are from 1982, and yet they're all exactly similar. Pure Michael. Don't know if he could have recorded a Cascio's house vocal in 1982, and nobody knows more than I do about whether or not MJ recorded at the Cascios in 1982, because..again..he's not here to tell us. But MJ supervised whatever happened, with the songs mentioned in this post, and that's paramount.

The fact that there are believer(s) that want to look all over Michael's back catalogue is very telling.

reminds me of a certain court case where the defense said 'they're trying to throw spaghetti all over the wall, and hoping that something sticks.'

edit: if i come in this thread again, then i will prove that i am an idiot that has seen Michael's magic remain again and again, through all tests, and somehow don't believe that it will still remain. but that won't stop it from remaining and him from being best selling artist of all time.

 

[Chamife]

Will probably fall on deaf ears (no pun intended):

[youtube]UClTiB-F9EM[/youtube]

0.23: Thissssss
0.31: songbird singzzzzzz
0.47: ssshoulder
0.58: matterssssss (now this is a very good example of the s I'm talking about, very Michaelish, can you hear it 'believers' ????)
1.39: kisssssss

And these s'es are especially recognizable in the bridge, IMO. I miss these in all of the Cascio songs.

Paula Abdul's songs: I very clearly hear two different voices in the verses and you can still recognize Paula's voice (more dominant, thanks Ivy). But I'm not too sure on 'Straight Up'. I have more difficulties hearing that. I believe this is Paula singing solo.

[youtube]El1kgCqD7Xk[/youtube]

In the Cascio songs I don't hear two voices in the verses, but one voice. Who hears two???? Not asking who (thinks he) knows there are two, but who HEARS two.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

I just wonder if physically is possible at all to fabricate one unique voice out of two different voices. Even when you blend two same voices from the same song there is some kind of reverb.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

Will probably fall on deaf ears (no pun intended):

[youtube]UClTiB-F9EM[/youtube]

0.23: Thissssss
0.31: songbird singzzzzzz
0.47: ssshoulder
0.58: matterssssss (now this is a very good example of the s I'm talking about, very Michaelish, can you hear it 'believers' ????)
1.39: kisssssss

And these s'es are especially recognizable in the bridge, IMO. I miss these in all of the Cascio songs.

Paula Abdul's songs: I very clearly hear two different voices in the verses and you can still recognize Paula's voice (more dominant, thanks Ivy). But I'm not too sure on 'Straight Up'. I have more difficulties hearing that. I believe this is Paula singing solo.

[youtube]El1kgCqD7Xk[/youtube]

In the Cascio songs I don't hear two voices in the verses, but one voice. Who hears two???? Not asking who (thinks he) knows there are two, but who HEARS two.

I see very well what you mean.

The "Ssss", the "shch", the "djsh", etc sounds. MJ had this typical way of pronouncing those sounds.