Monster - The Great Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

[samhabib]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

it was a 100% match.

Now you're just blatantly lying. At no stage has ANYONE - Sony included - claimed that the 'forensic audiologists' found the vocals to be a 100% match.

That's a blatant, bare-faced lie.

 

[AnnieRUOkay89]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

On "Monster" as on "Breaking News", and "Keep Your Head Up" the main singer is a voice impostor, but the producer DID ADD SOME REAL MICHAEL JACKSON VOCALS HERE AND THERE, so thats what confuses some people, it does not confuses me of course, but some people just cant hear so well.
So i understand the confusion and some still believing Michael is there singing , but ummm, no no, is not him

That's your opinion. Please remember there is no verifiable, or documented proof to support your claim as a fact, so you shouldn't push it as such.

 

[flutinggnee]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

Yes, I would love to see the documents with the audiologists' report. It would be interesting data.

 

[samhabib]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

That's your opinion. Please remember there is no verifiable, or documented proof to support your claim as a fact, so you shouldn't push it as such.

There is verifiable proof in the audio. Absolutely, undeniable, verifiable proof in the audio.

 

[samhabib]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

Yes, I would love to see the documents with the audiologists' report. It would be interesting data.

Something tells me that they will NEVER EVER make their findings public.

 

[Garden]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

There is verifiable proof in the audio. Absolutely, undeniable, verifiable proof in the audio.

Then you are terribly lazy! If I had such an absolutely, undeniable, verifiable proof... I would do something different than just discuss it on boards and showing questionnable clips.
I would move heaven and earth to become justice!
I don't know what moves you to discuss it but make no further steps...

 

[samhabib]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

Then you are terribly lazy! If I had such an absolutely, undeniable, verifiable proof... I would do something different than just discuss it on boards and showing questionnable clips.
I would move heaven and earth to become justice!
I don't know what moves you to discuss it but make no further steps...

Sony haven't sampled old vocals into the Cascio tracks? Is that your assertion?

 

[Arklove]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

There is verifiable proof in the audio. Absolutely, undeniable, verifiable proof in the audio.

....but, somehow, this isn't proof enough....I guess it's easier to believe Sony/Estate....you know, since they have all the 'proof' that they choose not to disclose..

 

[samhabib]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

....but, somehow, this isn't proof enough....I guess it's easier to believe Sony/Estate....you know, since they have all the 'proof' that they choose not to disclose..

Surely that should be the clincher? Surely? All this 'proof' that they haven't (because they can't) reveal it. That doesn't ring alarm bells for anyone? Teddy Riley talking about MJ's notes regarding Monster - which are completely non-existent - doesn't concern anyone?!?

 

[Garden]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

I just wonder if there is a way that will make them show their proof... with or without someone having to sue them....

 

[JacksonMan]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

Why would a functioning Michael Jackson have the same motivation to use an impersonator as a record company releasing an album of a deceased singer? In what parallel universe is that even comparable?.

MJ didn't need an impersonator because he would just use his own voice. Same goes for Sony. they have plenty of songs with his voice. So why would they need an impersonator?

They have approximately 250 million reasons actually.

so they paid 250 million dollars for the rights to music recorded by MJ, but then used songs not recorded by MJ? that makes no sense at all. They have 250 million reasons to use MJ's voice. they didn't pay 250 million dollars to use Malachi's voice. They have 250 million reasons to use MJ's voice. They aren't looking for some public relations nightmare. In fact they have a couple billion reasons not to want that. It would destroy their stock shares and everything. What economist working for Sony is going to tell this is a good idea? what the hell parallel capitalist universe is this idea even compatible with the goal of making money?

No he doesn't.

It sounds a lot different. come on. Be honest. I know that you know it sounds a lot different. A few years back people on you tube were having this same discussion about shout and 2000 watts.

No. You can tell it's not him BECAUSE it sounds different.

You can tell it's him because it sounds like him.

No. They don't.



At no stage has Michael Jackson ever sounded unlike Michael Jackson. Until now. So you do the math.

We only recognize so many of his vocal styles as him, because we have heard him do those before.

Your not giving the man his due credit. LIsten to the part in shout where he sings "how we make this world to be." It actually sounds 100% exactly like the same person singing the verses on Breaking News. the verses on shout sound 100% exactly like the verses on Monster.

the only difference is the melody. skip to 1:30 to hear the vocal style he used on the verses for breaking news. just listen to the whole song to hear the vocal styles used for the verses in monster. I'm not talking about the chorus in shout. The rest of the song.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPiGY58x9cE

 

[samhabib]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

^ I haven't got to work at anything. If you believe Michael Jackson sings those songs then bully for you. It impacts on my life in absolutely no way. You love Monster? Good for you. You love 'Michael's' vocals on Keep Your Head Up? Good for you. What I take exception to is people telling me that I don't know what I'm listening to and telling me complete untruths, eg. '100% match'.

If you do that then I've got every right to counter.

 

[Arklove]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

Surely that should be the clincher? Surely? All this 'proof' that they haven't (because they can't) reveal it. That doesn't ring alarm bells for anyone? Teddy Riley talking about MJ's notes regarding Monster - which are completely non-existent - doesn't concern anyone?!?

If they had any type of proof, the Cascios surely would have shown this on Oprah...But, they didn't....So, there you go.....

 

[JacksonMan]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

No. My theory is that the impersonator was asked to sing as close as he could to match Michael Jackson's voice. But failed. Miserably.

Your theory is that it doesn't sound like Michael Jackson hence it is Michael Jackson. That's one hell of a theory!

the thing is there are impersonators out there who could sound a lot more like a recognizeable MJ, than the vocals MJ laid down for these tracks, as well as a few of his previously released tracks.

Hypothetically if it was Malachi, don't you think it would have sounded more simmilair to the classic MJ than what we heard? why would Malachi try to suddenly not sound like MJ anymore now that he's finally being paid to impersonate him?

I'm not saying that if it sounds unlike MJ than it must be MJ. It's kind of insulting to keep wording it like that. I'm saying MJ can change his voice. He has diversity. He's not limited.

It's possible it's not MJ. It's possible all of the sound forensics experts lied. It's possible that Mj had been using an impersonator for years to create the appearance of a very wide vocal range. It's possible that Sony's stock share holders secretly wish to be broke working at McDonald's. It's possible. But none of this is likely. In order for this not to be Mj all of this would have to be true, because there is no possible way that the person singing on Monster and Breaking news is not the same guy singing on shout.

If monster and breaking news are not MJ, than shout can't be either, because it sounds exactly the same.

 

[Arklove]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

the verses on shout sound 100% exactly like the verses on Monster.

Absolutely not...

Are we talking about the same rapid fire verses on Shout? and you're comparing this to the verses on Monster? WOW.....That just baffles me....

 

[JacksonMan]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

^ I haven't got to work at anything. If you believe Michael Jackson sings those songs then bully for you. It impacts on my life in absolutely no way. You love Monster? Good for you. You love 'Michael's' vocals on Keep Your Head Up? Good for you. What I take exception to is people telling me that I don't know what I'm listening to and telling me complete untruths, eg. '100% match'.

If you do that then I've got every right to counter.

Maybe I take exception to people telling me what I'm hearing as well. Does that mean were not allowed to disagree? It's just fans here don't really have like actual good reasons for saying this. For years you guys have been bragging about how MJ can change his voice to the point that he sounds like a COMPLETELY different person.

Fans were saying this all the time how amazing it is that he can sing in one style and then sing in another style and sound like a completely different person.

It is possible these songs are not MJ, but in order for that to be the case a lot of very highly impropable things have to line up just right. The facts just don't add up to this not being MJ.

 

[JacksonMan]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

do the ad lybs on slave to the rythym sound anything like the falsetto in the chorus? those also sound like two completely different people. Maybe this whole time MJ's falsetto was actually being sung by an impersonator and he just sang the screaming parts.

Obvously this is sarcasm. I'm just saying. that is about as likely as what you guys are saying.

 

[samhabib]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

MJ didn't need an impersonator because he would just use his own voice. *Same goes for Sony. *they have plenty of songs with his voice. *So why would they need an impersonator? *

They have plenty of songs? From what we've been told they have 17-20. Is that plenty? Considering the authentic songs on 'Michael', only one of them is actually complete. 'Hold My Hand' and 'Another Day' are, effectively, duets. 'Behind The Mask' and 'Hollywood Tonight are incomplete'. 'Best of Joy' and 'The Way You Love Me' were also incomplete and produced after his death. 'Much Too Soon' is pretty much the only complete song.*

So why would Sony have an interest in using an impersonator? There's your answer.

so they paid 250 million dollars for the rights to music recorded by MJ, but then used songs not recorded by MJ? that makes no sense at all. *They have 250 million reasons to use MJ's voice. *they didn't pay 250 million dollars to use Malachi's voice. *They have 250 million reasons to use MJ's voice. *They aren't looking for some public relations nightmare. *In fact they have a couple billion reasons not to want that. *It would destroy their stock shares and everything. *What economist working for Sony is going to tell this is a good idea? what the hell parallel capitalist universe is this idea even compatible with the goal of making money?
It sounds a lot different. *come on. *Be honest. *I know that you know it sounds a lot different. *A few years back people on you tube were having this same discussion about shout and 2000 watts. *

Sony were probably thinking that the fans wouldn't notice the difference. They were probably expecting these tracks to be accepted with a few 'heees' and 'owwwwws' mixed in. Unfortunately for them, Michael Jackson has the most devoted fanbase in the world. And nothing gets past the more discerning of them.

I've never had a discussion about Shout or 2000 Watts. They both sound like Michael Jackson.

**

We only recognize so many of his vocal styles as him, because we have heard him do those before. *

You're all over the place. You claim that the Cascio songs are Michael because they don't sound like Michael. You're now saying he is recognisable because we've heard him do this before? Unreal.

Find me one Michael Jackson song that sounds like Keep Your Head Up. That's all. If you can do that then I'll stop posting.

Your not giving the man his due credit. *LIsten to the part in shout where he sings "how we make this world to be." *It actually sounds 100% exactly like the same person singing the verses on Breaking News. *the verses on shout sound 100% exactly like the verses on Monster. *

I'm giving Michael credit by distancing him from these monstrosities.*

Those songs all sound 100% unlike ANY Michael vocal I've ever heard. And considering that you earlier posted that your proof was that these songs DIDN'T sound like Michael, that's one hell of about-face!*

the only difference is the melody. *skip to 1:30 to hear the vocal style he used on the verses for breaking news. *just listen to the whole song to hear the vocal styles used for the verses in monster. *I'm not talking about the chorus in shout. *The rest of the song.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPiGY58x9cE

Complete waste of time. Those bogus songs sound NOTHING like Michael Jackson.

 

[JacksonMan]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

There is verifiable proof in the audio. Absolutely, undeniable, verifiable proof in the audio.

if you can undeniably prove it, then file a lawsuit and take your evidence to court. You will make millions of dollars. You got nothing to lose, unless it turns out that it is MJ, because then you'd be countersued.

But like you said, you have absolutely, undeniable, verifiable proof. If you have proof than sue Sony and prove it to the whole world, myself included. Afterwards I'll PM you and say I was wrong. Do it for MJ. Take your proof and expose Sony.

but if you don't have proof than don't claim you have proof.

 

[samhabib]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

It is possible these songs are not MJ, but in order for that to be the case a lot of very highly impropable things have to line up just right. The facts just don't add up to this not being MJ.

You've already claimed that the 'forensic audiologists' found the Cascio songs to be a 100% match and made those findings public. So why do you need any other evidence? Just post us the link to that finding.

 

[samhabib]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

if you can undeniably prove it, then file a lawsuit and take your evidence to court. You will make millions of dollars. You got nothing to lose, unless it turns out that it is MJ, because then you'd be countersued.

But like you said, you have absolutely, undeniable, verifiable proof. If you have proof than sue Sony and prove it to the whole world, myself included. Afterwards I'll PM you and say I was wrong. Do it for MJ. Take your proof and expose Sony.

but if you don't have proof than don't claim you have proof.

Completely irrelevant.

I don't have to sue George Bush knowing that there are no weopons of mass destruction in Iraq to be proved right. And I don't have to sue Sony to prove that they're wrong.

The tracks are completely bogus.

 

[JacksonMan]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

Absolutely not...

Are we talking about the same rapid fire verses on Shout? and you're comparing this to the verses on Monster? WOW.....That just baffles me....

why would it baffle you? It does sound just like it. It sounds like they even sped up his voice the way they sped it up. It sounds like he sang in the same voice, and they used the same computer tricks.

why does this baffle you? they sound exactly the same.

 

[JacksonMan]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

You've already claimed that the 'forensic audiologists' found the Cascio songs to be a 100% match and made those findings public. So why do you need any other evidence? Just post us the link to that finding.

you'll have to ask Gaz. Gaz put this in a sticky closed thread. I believe it was actually given directly to MJJ community forum by Sony. That's how I found out about it. I don't know where it is now.

 

[JacksonMan]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

Completely irrelevant.

I don't have to sue George Bush knowing that there are no weopons of mass destruction in Iraq to be proved right. And I don't have to sue Sony to prove that they're wrong.

The tracks are completely bogus.

That's because George Bush already admitted he was wrong about the WMDs. If bush was up on tv right now saying "we did find those weapons" then it would be a different story.

Do it. Your willing to sit here and argue with me but not the perpetrators themselves? Go make a few million if your so confident. The only thing stopping you is your own doubts. Don't do it for me. Do it for MJ.

 

[JacksonMan]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

They have plenty of songs? From what we've been told they have 17-20. Is that plenty? Considering the authentic songs on 'Michael', only one of them is actually complete. 'Hold My Hand' and 'Another Day' are, effectively, duets. 'Behind The Mask' and 'Hollywood Tonight are incomplete'. 'Best of Joy' and 'The Way You Love Me' were also incomplete and produced after his death. 'Much Too Soon' is pretty much the only complete song.*

So why would Sony have an interest in using an impersonator? There's your answer..

why not use slave to the rythym instead? or do you know where your children are? or the will i am tracks, or the redman tracks, or more invincible knock offs or the album he had already recorded before Invincible that never saw the light of day? and if Mj's vaults are as empty as you think they are, then why did the bidding go up to 250 million dollars? If they were just going to hire an impersonator than there wasn't much point in paying the 250 million dollars was there? I don't know. Maybe Sony was just feeling generous that day. Please answer those questions.

.

Sony were probably thinking that the fans wouldn't notice the difference. They were probably expecting these tracks to be accepted with a few 'heees' and 'owwwwws' mixed in. Unfortunately for them, Michael Jackson has the most devoted fanbase in the world. And nothing gets past the more discerning of them..

Sony was not thinking that fans wouldn't notice. That's the whole entire reason they investigated the tracks before me and you ever heard them. they were not expecting music critics or forensics experts to be that stupid.
.

I've never had a discussion about Shout or 2000 Watts. They both sound like Michael Jackson..

I will admit the guy singing shout sounds like the same guy singing breaking news. Yes I will admit that.

Look even if you don't believe it's MJ, there is no point in denying that his vocals on breaking news sound identical to his vocals during the acapella part of shout.

.

Find me one Michael Jackson song that sounds like Keep Your Head Up. That's all. If you can do that then I'll stop posting..

Keep your head up. doesn't even sound like MJ in a different voice. It sounds like regular MJ. Untill very rescently I hadn't even realized you guys were arguing about that song.

Try Butterflies and even I give you joy.


.

I'm giving Michael credit by distancing him from these monstrosities.*

Those songs all sound 100% unlike ANY Michael vocal I've ever heard. And considering that you earlier posted that your proof was that these songs DIDN'T sound like Michael, that's one hell of about-face!*.

I'm saying that if an impersonator wanted to try and trick you he would sing like Malachi on Let me Let go, and not like MJ on breaking news or shout, or 2000 watts, or Monster. Please stop being condesending. You know this is the point I was making, and your twisting my statement and taking it out of context for no purpose other than to hopefully get under my skin somehow. Even if I'm mistaken and you actually did misunderstand my point, it should be clear now.




.

Complete waste of time. Those bogus songs sound NOTHING like Michael Jackson.

so now listening to shout is a waste of time? It's a pretty good song man. Not as good as Mj's traditional style, but it's still good. Mj didn't always want to do the same thing all the time. He was looking for new sounds. He wanted to sound different.

 

[JacksonMan]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

Surely that should be the clincher? Surely? All this 'proof' that they haven't (because they can't) reveal it. That doesn't ring alarm bells for anyone? Teddy Riley talking about MJ's notes regarding Monster - which are completely non-existent - doesn't concern anyone?!?

what kind of proof do you have? you keep claiming you have undeniable proof, yet you don't prove it. Honestly if you were as confident as you say you are, you'd file a lawsuit.

 

[Arklove]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

why would it baffle you? It does sound just like it. It sounds like they even sped up his voice the way they sped it up. It sounds like he sang in the same voice, and they used the same computer tricks.

why does this baffle you? they sound exactly the same.

It baffles me because they sound like 2 different people; the verses sung on Shout sound like rapid fire precision, as I said....And, the verses sung on Monster don't even come close to that...THAT'S why it baffles me...But, if you feel they sound the same...hey, more power to you....

 

[JacksonMan]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

It baffles me because they sound like 2 different people; the verses sung on Shout sound like rapid fire precision, as I said....And, the verses sung on Monster don't even come close to that...THAT'S why it baffles me...But, if you feel they sound the same...hey, more power to you....

okay I actually have to come right out and say that I know you can hear how much alike they sound. there is no way those songs are not sung by the same person. If you could somehow prove that breaking news and monster were not MJ, it would simultaneously prove to me that shout wasn't MJ either, and the way his voice switches for the chorus, it's really obvious that shout is MJ. Just like the ad lybs on Monster are obviously MJ.

 

[Arklove]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

okay I actually have to come right out and say that I know you can hear how much alike they sound.

ummm...You presume to know what I know? what I think? what I hear? I'm telling you they DON'T sound alike...If I thought they did, I'd say it...Simple as...

 

[JacksonMan]

Re: Monster - The Great Debate

how can you not hear it though? It's more than just simmillair. Have you like very rescently listened to the middle part of shout where he sings "how we make this world to be, something something living torturing of mind"

That's EXACTLY the same as how he sounds when he says "they wanna see that I fall cause I'm Michael Jackson" in breaking news.

And the verses on monster sound exactly the same as the verses on shout. whatever you mean by rapid fire precsion, well Monster was sped up just like shout was sped up. as far as precision goes neither song has him off beat.