Latest on MJJC

Official Statement From The Estate Of Michael Jackson To The Fans

Here as a picture ...

corey.jpg
 
To All Those Fans Believing Cory Rooney who is Taryll Jackson's manager.
Did you know that Cory Rooney worked with Michael during INVINCIBLE called "She Was Loving Me" that Michael never approved because he found out that Cory was Tommy Mottola's spy during INVINCIBLE.
Did you know that Cory was managed by Tommy Mottola during INVINCIBLE?
Why would Taryll Jackson be managed by the same Cory when Michael hated him so much.
Cory was not Michael's friend.

Cory & Teddy have a public conflict, right now:

Teddy calls Cory a liar, says Taryll was hostile in the meeting...

1. WE LET HIM TLK AS WE NOD OUR HEADS CAUSE YOU CAN'T TELL AN ADAMANT PERSON ANYTHING.
2. WE LET TARYLL TALK CAUSE HE WAS VERY HOSTILE IN THE MEETING...CONT
3. WHAT I SAID IN THAT MEETING WAS IT DON'T MAKE ME NO DIFFERENCE WHETHER THESE SONGS GET USE OR NOT. ITS THE ESTATES DECISION. CONT
4.THE PEOPLE WHO WERE IN THAT ROOM DIDN'T WANT TO ARGUE AND GO BACK AND FORTH WITH TARYLL WHO SPOKE THE WHOLE SESSION.
5.CORY IS A LIE AND WHEN HE CAME TO MY SESSION HE WAS THE ONLY ONE ON TARYLL'S SIDE...CONT
6.CORY PRODUCE AND MANAGE TARYLL. CONNECTION THERE...ASK WHY HE DON'T SAID THAT ABOUT SONY? READ BTW LINES

Cory answered on Facebook:

Cory Rooney I just read Teddy's comment about me on twitter and the funny thing is, before this he had a great relationship with Taryll Jackson!!! Living right down the street from him and communicating with him constantly about music, studio gear, and... the overall state of the business you would think that he would have enough respect or be man enough to say what he felt!!!!!!!!!!!!! I sure would and I will when I get back to LA!!!!!!!!!!! I don't specifically mention Sony or anyone yet because we still don't know who the actual person is to Blame and I'm far from stupid!!! I will say this, it very easy to see the ones that got paid!!!!!!!! :0) I DO NOT MANAGE TARYLL JACKSON!!! he is just one of my closest friends along with his brothers and other members of the Jackson family including the Late and great Michael Jackson. Please YouTube anything on Taryll and tell me if you think there is a hostile bone in his body!! They better stop playing with me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
SmoothCollins said:
This statement is 0% no different than the arguments they've had before. I can't believe people are believing it based upon what other people say- trust yourself, people.

Have you ever seen Changeling? Everyone "official" kept telling Christine: "This IS your son." (But his height is shorter!) "Yeah that happens under stress". (But he doesn't look like my son!) "Yeah it's been a year, he grew." (It's not my son!!) "Give him a try- everyone else says it is. Look lady, we've had it officially confirmed that this IS your son. You are crazy- just accept what we say."

She wasn't going to accept people's thoughts just because they were official people in uniform- she obviously knew with her heart that wasn't her son and she didn't let people convince her to just swallow it. You guys KNOW what you hear. Believe in yourself.
Click to expand...

That is exactly how I feel and that's the first thing that came to my mind when I tried to explain to people why I take this so bad. It's not like we made up our minds beforehand not to believe that song is sung by Michael. We were looking for it with great anticipation just like everyone else and like everyone else didn't believe the family. But I just can't ignore my [FONT=&quot]initial [/FONT]response that this isn't Michael even though so many say it is, parts of my wishes I could.

Contrary to what has been said here, it is not that I say I don't think it is Michael singing because I don't like the song. I wish it was that simple because not everybody has to like all songs. I actually like the song a lot - it has a great beat to it and is very catchy. But I can't listen to it without feeling bad because I know that I am hearing somebody [FONT=&quot]else's [/FONT] voice instead of Michael's. If Sony was to say from the [FONT=&quot]beginning [/FONT]that they didn't have a lot of Michael's vocals and still they think it is something we would love to hear so they are bringing in somebody to fill in - I don't think people would have taken this so badly - I know I wouldn't. But it's the fact that they tried to pass this song off as being sung by Michael when it isn't that makes it so bad - I feel [FONT=&quot]deceived[/FONT].
 
abigaillovesmj said:
That is exactly how I feel and that's the first thing that came to my mind when I tried to explain to people why I take this so bad. It's not like we made up our minds beforehand not to believe that song is sung by Michael. We were looking for it with great anticipation just like everyone else and like everyone else didn't believe the family. But I just can't ignore my [FONT=&quot]initial [/FONT]response that this isn't Michael even though so many say it is, parts of my wishes I could.

Contrary to what has been said here, it is not that I say I don't think it is Michael singing because I don't like the song. I wish it was that simple because not everybody has to like all songs. I actually like the song a lot - it has a great beat to it and is very catchy. But I can't listen to it without feeling bad because I know that I am hearing somebody [FONT=&quot]else's [/FONT]voice instead of Michael's. If Sony was to say from the [FONT=&quot]beginning [/FONT]that they didn't have a lot of Michael's vocals and still they think it is something we would love to hear so they are bringing in somebody to fill in - I don't think people would have taken this so badly - I know I wouldn't. But it's the fact that they tried to pass this song off as being sung by Michael when it isn't that makes it so bad - I feel [FONT=&quot]deceived[/FONT].
Click to expand...

i'll go even further than that. i don't think MJ has ANYthing to do with this song. to me..it's NOT catchy. tell me..if you had a baby sitting in a car seat, and you took any three random MJ songs, and played them on the radio, and you didn't know the titles to any of the songs...which of the lines in the songs, do you think, with your child's heart, is going to be the line you sing, or the baby will sing, in hum along fashion? we've already seen toddlers do this with countless MJ songs. and with any one of the songs, the toddlers would all sing the same line. that's how big the hook is.

we know what line you will sing in Billie Jean
we know what line you will sing in Beat It
we know what line you will sing in Just Good Friends
we know what line you will sing in The Girl Is Mine
we know what line you will sing in Speechless
we know what line you will sing in Man In The Mirror..and MJ didn't even write that one, but he felt it was for him to sing.
for instance, we know for BIllie Jean, it's 'Billie Jean is not my lover'
i don't even have to tell you what line you would sing from 'Speechless', even if you didn't know the title.

now..you know what i wish..i wish, in all honesty, ten random people would pm me, with the line they would sing, from Breaking News. and i wish, in all honesty, all ten people would not communicate with each other. and i would honestly report back what everybody said..i would even do it, without giving names of the people, if they wished.

Michael was a stickler for the hook line, and sinker. and i mean, a hook that really stood up, and had a beginning, middle and end to it.
 
Last edited:
You are right about that BUT, BN is a very rough demo I think in all sense, the lyrics, the vocals, the production (at least when Michael was around) so there's is no way of knowing how the final production would sound like if he finalized it. And I can probably give you other Michael songs that is not that easy to pick a common line from.
I still don't know why though that they choose to add that song to the album. There are other almost or fully completed songs to add from what we've heard.
 
noa2 said:
You are right about that BUT, BN is a very rough demo I think in all sense, the lyrics, the vocals, the production (at least when Michael was around) so there's is no way of knowing how the final production would sound like if he finalized it. And I can probably give you other Michael songs that is not that easy to pick a common line from.
I still don't know why though that they choose to add that song to the album. There are other almost or fully completed songs to add from what we've heard.
Click to expand...

what Michael songs can you think of, that aren't easy to pick a common line from?
 
Ok, what I mean is that it's easy to pick songs everyone have heard millions of time. BN is not finished and is new.
Ok, let say Cheater, 2000 watts, 2Bad, Little Susie, Fall again, Be not allways, Cry. Just like that on top of my head. I can't say everybody will pick the exact lyric lines.
 
noa2 said:
Ok, what I mean is that it's easy to pick songs everyone have heard millions of time. BN is not finished and is new.
Ok, let say Cheater, 2000 watts, 2Bad, Little Susie, Fall again, Be not allways, Cry. Just like that on top of my head. I can't say everybody will pick the exact lyric lines.
Click to expand...

i beg to differ. lol. i've never heard Be Not Always, and Little Susie is special exception, because nobody is going to make a caring song for a child like that, but Michael...but the others, i bet we would, a whole lot more than Breaking News. you bring up an interesting point, though. other things that identify the real Michael, do include the child loving sentiment in Little Susie, which is original. because i'm not talking about somebody just saying give to a child organization. but somebody feeling for a random child, as if he was a child, himself.

and as far as not being finished and new..that excuse would still yeild a great hook in a genuine MJ song. the other version of Dangerous on the box set, still screams the chorus.

edit; i just heard Be Not Always, for the first time. 'Always, be not always, and if always'...

aside from the fact that i was sucked in and in tears, after hearing it only 1 time. something that was pure, and from the start, as with all MJ songs..no effort..first time...hooked. first person experience..not somebody speaking for him. that's what i get from genuine mj songs. i'm pulled in. don't feel i have to campaign for the song, i'm pulled in beyond my control, and don't want to get out. this won't be the last time i listen to Be not Always..although, i may wait, because i'm too broken up to listen to it a second time, for now.

i've always wanted to move forward in life. but i'm tainted from moving forward, by Sony. and i want to go back to MJ's treasures, from when he was still here. thanks for helping me to discover 'Be Not Always.'
 
Last edited:
I'm glad you liked and found Be not, one of my favourites. That one is finished by the way. I see your point but I still believe that Breaking News is so early that if it were finished by Michael every word could have been replaced and obviously sung and produced 1000 times better. Then it would be remembered better.
 
noa2 said:
I'm glad you liked and found Be not, one of my favourites. That one is finished by the way. I see your point but I still believe that Breaking News is so early that if it were finished by Michael every word could have been replaced and obviously sung and produced 1000 times better. Then it would be remembered better.
Click to expand...

you are a strong cheerleader for BN, but from what you say there, BN might as well be a totally different song. i still recognize 'dangerous', though the chassis, so to speak, is different. by the way, i haven't listened to Little Susie in a long time cus of the heartbreak associated with it. it has a gravitational hook, too. but i'm glad u see what i'm saying.
 
summer said:
Can't speak for others but for me it was more like:

First: "This can't be MJ...it doesn't sound like him. The song's okay...but MJ doesn't sound like MJ!"

Then: "Okay so they say it's definately MJ on the album....but no matter HOW HARD I try and no matter HOW HARD I try to tell myself its MJ singing...I just still don't think he sounds like MJ". And THAT is what I have a problem with. In all these years I have NEVER heard MJ sound different on a song..I have never had to TELL myself it's MJ I'm listening to...I have never had to be CONVINCED. When I heard a snippet of "Another Day" and "Place With No Name" I knew right away it was MJ. I didn't have ANY kind of doubts. I still don't (well...I haven't heard the FINAL versions, so I am only talking about the demo snippets when I say that). I went to listen to Breaking News convinced it's MJ and he just didn't sound like him. Now that they tell us it's him, I'm TRYING to give it a chance and use the "power of suggestion"....but no matter how hard I try...it doesn't sound like him. So if I and many others are having such a hard time recognizing MJ's voice, obviously something is wrong and something needs to be done. Like I've said before already and without trying to sound like a broken record, I think all that most of the fans who say it doesn't sound like MJ would want is that they either go back in the studio to do what they gotta do to get the vocals sound like MJ since they are absolutely sure MJ's singing the song on the demo and sounds like himself on the demo. So go back to the studio...mix it again, change the balance...or do whatever you gotta do to change what's preventing him from sounding like himself right now. I'm not an engineer so what do I know what they gotta do..but obviously something's not right. And if they can't change it then take that song off the album and replace it with a song where MJ sounds like MJ. Can't be that hard! I'm not gonna boycott the other songs like Hold My Hand and Another Day, etc. because I know MJ definately sang those (that is, unless they go mess up those songs again and change them so much that MJ doesn't sound like MJ on them either).

Point is...if they tell us it's MJ, fine. So it's MJ. But it doesn't change the FACT that MJ doesn't sound like MJ so something IS wrong, no matter what they say. And all I am asking for is them to do something about THAT. Like I said...send the song back to be worked on again...or take it off the album. I'm fine with either one. As long as the end product sounds like MJ, like it's supposed to.
Click to expand...

That's exactly how I feel too :clapping:
 
The reason why Sony/Estate have not removed the Cascio tracks from the 'Michael' album is simply because due to extensive testing they have concluded that MJ is indeed singing on BN, KYHU and Monster.
Along with the other seven tracks...They also underwent the same dilligent testing.

An international conglomerate, Sony and it's officials simply would not, in their wildest dreams enter the agreement they have with the Estate and pay US$250 Million for the rights to publish these tracks if they were indeed...fake.
Potentially there's too much on the line for them financially to lose in all areas of business if this were the case.

Sony and the Estate clearly realize, and this is a generous estimate, that a combined 15 000 fanatical Michael Jackson fans that log on to online forums each and every day claiming they'll boycott the album won't even create a tiny dent in the sales of 'Michael', even in the unlikely circumstance that these fans actually follow through with their laughable "boycott".
C'mon, those who are stating they'll boycott the album, will one day, sooner or later purchase the album.
Even if they stick to their guns and do not purchase it, in the overall scheme of things, 15 000 people do not matter when talking in incriments of MILLIONS.

I see many people's reason for "boycotting" the album/Cascio tracks is because they "don't hear Michael"...In my listening experience, of the tracks we've heard so far, I can clearly hear Michael Jackson in each track. Fair enough, James Porte's vocals in sections of 'Breaking News' do come to the forefront for a second or two here and there in an attempt to clean up some rough demo vocals from Mike...But other than that, I really cannot understand what the big fuss is about.

In all this, people who refute scientific forensic evidence and testing in my opinion are of a juvenile mindset. For example, when a murder is committed, and the culprit is aprehended via DNA findings at the scene nobody questions that! For a good reason too, because it's been proven! Sony/Estate would not embellish stories about waveform analysis performed by the FBI no less.

Sure, I know we haven't seen that evidence thus far, however, Sony/Estate have left themselves wide open if any of this were untrue, that is an error that high ranking executives and officials simply would not make for reasons I explained above.

Before I was banned from here two weeks ago, I made mention that I believed that certain members of the Jackson family and their associates, who have a possible financial interest if this album fails, started all this "fake" vocals rubbish and aimed those unfounded accusations at Michael's most hardcore fan base, the online community. Who would take these rumours and run with them! This is exactly what has happened...

As others have stated, If the Jacksons etc were so concerned about all of this, why has no legal action been taken!? This is especially strange considering just how litigious this family is! Instead, we are all treated to a circus sideshow on Twitter :smilerolleyes:...It is all, utterly ridiculous.
Finally, I'll state once again, (as my posts with this opinion in them were deleted by MJJC staff when I was banned) that I believe the reason why 3T ignited these baseless claims about fraudulent vocals in the Cacio tracks is simply because their songs were not chosen and didn't make the cut on the 'Michael' LP.

Think about it, 3T after more than 15 years in the wilderness, forgotten by the media would really appreciate the attention that songs of theirs included on the new album would bring them. Media attention and visibility are essential when attempting to jumpstart a flagging career.

In conclusion, I'd just like to mention Memefan and MJStorm, I have appreciated the logic that is shown in your posts and during the time I was banned, I was lurking the board and nodding along (lol) with just about everything you guys posted...:)
 
Steve001 said:
The reason why Sony/Estate have not removed the Cascio tracks from the 'Michael' album is simply because due to extensive testing they have concluded that MJ is indeed singing on BN, KYHU and Monster.
Along with the other seven tracks...They also underwent the same dilligent testing.

An international conglomerate, Sony and it's officials simply would not, in their wildest dreams enter the agreement they have with the Estate and pay US$250 Million for the rights to publish these tracks if they were indeed...fake.
Potentially there's too much on the line for them financially to lose in all areas of business if this were the case.

Sony and the Estate clearly realize, and this is a generous estimate, that a combined 15 000 fanatical Michael Jackson fans that log on to online forums each and every day claiming they'll boycott the album won't even create a tiny dent in the sales of 'Michael', even in the unlikely circumstance that these fans actually follow through with their laughable "boycott".
C'mon, those who are stating they'll boycott the album, will one day, sooner or later purchase the album.
Even if they stick to their guns and do not purchase it, in the overall scheme of things, 15 000 people do not matter when talking in incriments of MILLIONS.

I see many people's reason for "boycotting" the album/Cascio tracks is because they "don't hear Michael"...In my listening experience, of the tracks we've heard so far, I can clearly hear Michael Jackson in each track. Fair enough, James Porte's vocals in sections of 'Breaking News' do come to the forefront for a second or two here and there in an attempt to clean up some rough demo vocals from Mike...But other than that, I really cannot understand what the big fuss is about.

In all this, people who refute scientific forensic evidence and testing in my opinion are of a juvenile mindset. For example, when a murder is committed, and the culprit is aprehended via DNA findings at the scene nobody questions that! For a good reason too, because it's been proven! Sony/Estate would not embellish stories about waveform analysis performed by the FBI no less.

Sure, I know we haven't seen that evidence thus far, however, Sony/Estate have left themselves wide open if any of this were untrue, that is an error that high ranking executives and officials simply would not make for reasons I explained above.

Before I was banned from here two weeks ago, I made mention that I believed that certain members of the Jackson family and their associates, who have a possible financial interest if this album fails, started all this "fake" vocals rubbish and aimed those unfounded accusations at Michael's most hardcore fan base, the online community. Who would take these rumours and run with them! This is exactly what has happened...

As others have stated, If the Jacksons etc were so concerned about all of this, why has no legal action been taken!? This is especially strange considering just how litigious this family is! Instead, we are all treated to a circus sideshow on Twitter :smilerolleyes:...It is all, utterly ridiculous.
Finally, I'll state once again, (as my posts with this opinion in them were deleted by MJJC staff when I was banned) that I believe the reason why 3T ignited these baseless claims about fraudulent vocals in the Cacio tracks is simply because their songs were not chosen and didn't make the cut on the 'Michael' LP.

Think about it, 3T after more than 15 years in the wilderness, forgotten by the media would really appreciate the attention that songs of theirs included on the new album would bring them. Media attention and visibility are essential when attempting to jumpstart a flagging career.

In conclusion, I'd just like to mention Memefan and MJStorm, I have appreciated the logic that is shown in your posts and during the time I was banned, I was lurking the board and nodding along (lol) with just about everything you guys posted...:)
Click to expand...

Agreed...great post! I also think in terms of the fact that this nonsense could actually be a PR stunt.....
 
Steve001 said:
I see many people's reason for "boycotting" the album/Cascio tracks is because they "don't hear Michael"...In my listening experience, of the tracks we've heard so far, I can clearly hear Michael Jackson in each track. Fair enough, James Porte's vocals in sections of 'Breaking News' do come to the forefront for a second or two here and there in an attempt to clean up some rough demo vocals from Mike...But other than that, I really cannot understand what the big fuss is about.
Click to expand...

But surely you must admit, that people arent just saying it isnt MJ for the hell of it. Even Sony themselves must have thought the vocals sounded questionable otherwise they wouldnt have done tests on the vocals.

Steve001 said:
In all this, people who refute scientific forensic evidence and testing in my opinion are of a juvenile mindset. For example, when a murder is committed, and the culprit is aprehended via DNA findings at the scene nobody questions that! For a good reason too, because it's been proven! Sony/Estate would not embellish stories about waveform analysis performed by the FBI no less.
Click to expand...

If I see the evidence that tests have been done then I will probably believe it. They can claim they have done tests all they want, but until their is solid proof in front of me. Nothing is going to convince me that it is MJ on these songs. I have tried to believe it, but I just cant. I listen to it and dont sense MJ on these songs. Except for parts.

Steve001 said:
Before I was banned from here two weeks ago, I made mention that I believed that certain members of the Jackson family and their associates, who have a possible financial interest if this album fails, started all this "fake" vocals rubbish and aimed those unfounded accusations at Michael's most hardcore fan base, the online community. Who would take these rumours and run with them! This is exactly what has happened...

As others have stated, If the Jacksons etc were so concerned about all of this, why has no legal action been taken!? This is especially strange considering just how litigious this family is! Instead, we are all treated to a circus sideshow on Twitter :smilerolleyes:...It is all, utterly ridiculous.
Finally, I'll state once again, (as my posts with this opinion in them were deleted by MJJC staff when I was banned) that I believe the reason why 3T ignited these baseless claims about fraudulent vocals in the Cacio tracks is simply because their songs were not chosen and didn't make the cut on the 'Michael' LP.

Think about it, 3T after more than 15 years in the wilderness, forgotten by the media would really appreciate the attention that songs of theirs included on the new album would bring them. Media attention and visibility are essential when attempting to jumpstart a flagging career.
Click to expand...

So I guess you did see the tweets that Taj made then? He also said he supports the real songs on the album. So they are not exactly 100% against the album.

You all seem to be ignoring the fact that these vocals do not sound like the MJ we all know. You act as if people are just saying it doesnt sound like MJ for the sake of it.

Whether its MJ or not, they do not sound like the MJ we all know...so people have good reason to be doubting the authenticity of the vocals. As I said before, even Sony must have doubted the vocals if they had to have all these tests run right?
 
L.T.D said:
But surely you must admit, that people arent just saying it isnt MJ for the hell of it. Even Sony themselves must have thought the vocals sounded questionable otherwise they wouldnt have done tests on the vocals.
Click to expand...

The naysayers who initiated the "fake" vocals theory most certainly have everything to gain from not only, the "fake" vocals themselves but also the attention such explosive suggestions bring upon them.
The forensic testing that apparently took place we must assume is standard practice, since the artist is now deceased and not just any artist, we are talking about Michael Jackson! The biggest selling musical artist EVER! This is an album that is going to sell in the many millions and huge financial gains are on the horizon. I believe the testing was done merely as a safeguard for Sony/Estate.

If not, then it was to simply appease the grumpy 3T boys etc...To deter them from drastic action, such as claiming the vocals on several tracks are "fakes".

L.T.D said:
If I see the evidence that tests have been done then I will probably believe it. They can claim they have done tests all they want, but until their is solid proof in front of me. Nothing is going to convince me that it is MJ on these songs. I have tried to believe it, but I just cant. I listen to it and dont sense MJ on these songs. Except for parts.
Click to expand...

The Estate issued their statement with the forensic evidence mentioned as an announcement to say "This is what we have, If you wish to step-up and take these slanderous "fake vocals" claims to the next level and initiate legal proceedings, this is what you're going against!"

The Estate/Sony are under no pressure the publish these findings publicly yet, as the whiners and moaners making these claims have not even so much as hinted towards an attempt to prove themselves. All we have had is a baseless smear campaign on a public media platform. As I stated earlier, considering how litigious the Jackson's can be/are...It's astonishing that no legal action has been taken.

L.T.D said:
So I guess you did see the tweets that Taj made then? He also said he supports the real songs on the album. So they are not exactly 100% against the album.
Click to expand...

To me, that's a copout from Taj...In the highest degree of probability, there is no way a logical person with the "concerns" the grumpy 3T boys have would support an official product in any way, shape or form that heavily features "fraudulent" material just because the "other seven tracks are legit". If they actually believed their own claims...swift and severe legal action would have been implemented by now surely.

L.T.D said:
You all seem to be ignoring the fact that these vocals do not sound like the MJ we all know.
Click to expand...

Well...all I can say here is that listen to the verses in 'Escape', they do not reflect much on MJ's back catalogue either. It's clear Mike has experimented with different sounds not just with 'Escape' but of course with '2000 Watts', 'Shout' and 'Breaking News' to name a few.

L.T.D said:
Sony must have doubted the vocals if they had to have all these tests run right?
Click to expand...

Not necessarily...again, given the huge celebrity of Michael Jackson and the excitement and buzz that was to surround this new release, forensic testing may have been pre-assumed in this case. Keep in mind, US$250 Million is a heck of a lot of moolah!
Wouldn't you, and any other clear thinking person, If put in the position of unloading that amount of money based on audio recordings of a deceased man want to make absolutely certain that these were genuine!? If at least to prevent claims of the product being "fraudulent"?

Also, further tests were most likely carried out to appease the Jackson nephews and reduce the chances of a situation like this being instigated by cranky former stars who so desperately crave some stardom once again. An inclusion on this 'Michael' album would have been HUGE for 3T, not only in boosting their public recognition once again but also injecting some cash into the Jackson family coffers.

**EDIT**: I'd also like to add that Sony themselves, are a publicly traded company on the stock exchange. As such, they have shareholders and investors to please and keep happy. Any frivolous spending if not shown to be wise, can and will cause an uproar amongst these important people who help keep Sony afloat. Forensic testing was most likely done to appease them as well.
 
Last edited:
Steve001 said:
Thanks...Those are the only kind I have! :cheeky:
Click to expand...
I also agree with you but I am done with Breaking News war. :smilerolleyes:
I loved BN from the first second I heared it. Of course, hearing is subjective and like the other senses, easily fooled but I never doubted for a second who is singing. Michael Jackson (and another singer on backing vocal). Cheers!
 
Steve001 said:
Finally, I'll state once again, (as my posts with this opinion in them were deleted by MJJC staff when I was banned) that I believe the reason why 3T ignited these baseless claims about fraudulent vocals in the Cacio tracks is simply because their songs were not chosen and didn't make the cut on the 'Michael' LP.

Think about it, 3T after more than 15 years in the wilderness, forgotten by the media would really appreciate the attention that songs of theirs included on the new album would bring them. Media attention and visibility are essential when attempting to jumpstart a flagging career.
Click to expand...

Is it fair to say that 3T had issues with the Cascio tracks soley becasue they were jealous? Becasue their songs were not chosen? This is baseless character attack.

3T had no issues with Hold My Hand. They praised the song and fully supported the single. 3T didn't oppose the whole album. They only opposed the questionable tracks.

Some of us here have concerns on the Casios tracks and we are perceived as irrational conspiracy theorists who were swayed by the rumor or fans who don't know Michael's voice, etc...

Sigh... I listen to Michael on a daily basis. I listen to not only the most popular songs, but every Michael Jackson song out there. I listen to songs from I Want You Back to Hold My Hand. I believe I can recite the tracklist of all his albums (including the Jackson 5 and the Jacksons albums). I still feel the vocals on the Cascio tracks are highly manipulated (to say the best).

Some fans or Quincy Jones or Rodney Jerkins or Jonathan Moffet or 3T raised concerns. Supporters of the album then called the above people negative, irrational, jealous, selfish, childish...

Some of us here who are doubtful about the Cascio tracks were very excited about the album. We followed the new album thread religiously. Trust me, we would rather sing priase to the tracks then being disheartened...
 
Steve001 said:
The naysayers who initiated the "fake" vocals theory most certainly have everything to gain from not only, the "fake" vocals themselves but also the attention such explosive suggestions bring upon them.
The forensic testing that apparently took place we must assume is standard practice, since the artist is now deceased and not just any artist, we are talking about Michael Jackson! The biggest selling musical artist EVER! This is an album that is going to sell in the many millions and huge financial gains are on the horizon. I believe the testing was done merely as a safeguard for Sony/Estate.

If not, then it was to simply appease the grumpy 3T boys etc...To deter them from drastic action, such as claiming the vocals on several tracks are "fakes".
Click to expand...

You making assumptions and doubting 3T's motives behind these claims, isnt much different from people doubting what Sony and the Estate are telling us.

I'm not pointing the finger at anyone, I dont know who is responsible for this and it wouldnt be right to start throwing out accusations. I admit that within the first week of hearing this song I had done just that, but I have since come to my senses.

I dont think people should be going around blaming Sony, we dont really know who is to blame. I dont think its right to start doubting 3t's reasoning behind throwing out these claims either. This isnt just 3T saying this either, we have heard that Michael's own mother and kids dont think its him either. People seem to be forgetting that. The theory that they have been brainwashed by other members of the family is ridiculous as well.

I dont see what you mean saying that Taj saying he will support the real songs on the album is a copout. Before you said they were trying to lead all of the fans on to try and destroy the album...why would he then start saying that he supports other songs on the album? Doesnt make a whole lot of sense.

I think 3T's reasoning for making these claims is exactly the same as all of us. They simply have heard the vocals and dont think they sound like Michael.

You brought up the verses in 'Escape', the pronounciation of the words in Escape are exactly the same as Michael's. Thats the main thing about the vocals, certain words are pronounced differently and its really noticeable. He had experimented with his voice before, but never to the point where people would actually doubt its him singing.

So now you've basically admitted that Michael does sound different on the track, as you have offered the theory that he was experimenting with his voice. Surely you can now see that we have reason to at least doubt the vocals are Michael's.

What is it you believe by the way? He sounds different because they are raw demo vocals, or because he was simply experimenting with his voice. Or is it both?
 
L.T.D said:
But surely you must admit, that people arent just saying it isnt MJ for the hell of it. Even Sony themselves must have thought the vocals sounded questionable otherwise they wouldnt have done tests on the vocals.

As I said before, even Sony must have doubted the vocals if they had to have all these tests run right?
Click to expand...

Actually not necessarily , you have to think it from the legal perspective.

Sony could have been 1,000% sure that the vocals are Michael's but the moment someone (3T and family) raises authenticity issues the reasonable action was to get the vocals tested. Sony wouldn't put a "could be fake" vocals on an album or go with their "gut feeling or personal belief that the vocals are Michael's" and make themselves vulnerable to millions of dollars worth of lawsuits. Of course they would want to test the vocals and make sure that they are legit , it's a solid business decision: It's simply covering their bases.
 
ivy said:
Actually not necessarily , you have to think it from the legal perspective.

Sony could have been 1,000% sure that the vocals are Michael's but the moment someone (3T and family) raises authenticity issues the reasonable action was to get the vocals tested. Sony wouldn't put a "could be fake" vocals on an album or go with their "gut feeling or personal belief that the vocals are Michael's" and make themselves vulnerable to millions of dollars worth of lawsuits. Of course they would want to test the vocals and make sure that they are legit , it's a solid business decision: It's simply covering their bases.
Click to expand...

sp when do i get big enough, as a coporation, to look as if i'm testing my product, with what LOOKS like independent people, although i didn't objectively secure the opinions of EVERY person that worked musically with MJ...just the ones that look like they
emphatically agree with me?(unlike TMez, who called everyone involved in MJ's life, for the defense, and was willing to challenge everyone that the prosecustion brought up..even the made up ones...for Michael's child molestation trial.)

ironically, i wouldn't have thought of Quincy Jones(of all people), if it hadn't been for Roger Friedman.

so..what looks like going through the motions, should prevent lawsuits?

as for the forensic people, sony can claim whatever they want about them. i don't have access to them, so i have to take their word for it.

not comforting.

it's curios that the mother and children didn't think this was MJ's voice on the track. they're supposed to have the most to gain, from this project.

i don't think sonyy covered all their bases. but, i'm sure there are people who still think they did cover em.
 
Last edited:
Kikuchiyo said:
I also agree with you but I am done with Breaking News war. :smilerolleyes:
I loved BN from the first second I heared it. Of course, hearing is subjective and like the other senses, easily fooled but I never doubted for a second who is singing. Michael Jackson (and another singer on backing vocal). Cheers!
Click to expand...

Agree. I loved BN from the beginning and I think Michael has the right to experiment with his music and his voice .

And as for the all negativity surroundung the album , what if Sony and the Estate do it on purpose ? We know bad and negative news sells better that good one. This bad advertising is a good promotion for the album that needs not much money . Fans and no fans promote the album themselves without Sony .It's a kind of innovation in promotion.

Just a thought.
 
Olivegirl said:
Agree. I loved BN from the beginning and I think Michael has the right to experiment with his music and his voice .

And as for the all negativity surroundung the album , what if Sony and the Estate do it on purpose ? We know bad and negative news sells better that good one. This bad advertising is a good promotion for the album that needs not much money . Fans and no fans promote the album themselves without Sony .It's a kind of innovation in promotion.

Just a thought.
Click to expand...

i don't buy something just because of controversy. if i did that, i'd buy beer, cigarettes and whiskey. and a toyota..even if they did kill people.

i buy something because it's real, and integral. my conscience has to live with my purchase. i'm not a rebel for it's own cause....

or somebody who buys something because the media tells me to. or somebody who buys something because the media tells me not to. i have a mind of my own. and there's a lot of people who think like me, in that regard.

i will say this though. i heard a lot of people arguing your argument. and yet, with the Invincible album, i heard a lot of people who think like you, say that the Invincible album, didn't sell well. so there's a lot of inconsistencies, there. so, this is a good argument for people not knowing how well it sold. and, for that matter, a good argument for Invincible outselling Thriller.
but for Invincible, the argument is better, because, in no wise, did MJ ever truly look like the bad guy, to anyone. he was the true little guy, and underdog, and vulnerable one, that inspired much sympathy, against a lot of mean Goliaths. those who said bad things about him, knew it, but just were hateful...or blamed the media(including the child molestation stuff). and a lot confessed, so, after his death.

and what doesn't really help your argument, is that MJ didn't try to be controversial, nor did anyone try to deliberately look at it from afar and say 'yay, this is a controversy, so he'll sell', the way people are looking at this current situation, and deliberately saying 'yay, controversy, it will sell'. there's something false and artificial about being deliberate, in calling something a cotroversy, like that, with glee. it's hollow.

genuine controveries sell, but those other kind, feel like they're drummed up by the media. and the genuine kind tend to do better than the artificial kind, when it comes to sales. the genuine can keep selling on their own merit. the other kind, need the media. and when the media quits, so does the selling. and, ofttimes, the selling quits before the media quits, with the artificial controversies.
the artificial runs sprints, and the genuine runs marathons.

i mean, it's like people looked at Michael's life, and then look at this situation, and say..aha..Michael's life was controversial, and it sold music,(the sold music part, they keep to themselves, cus they don't want to admit Invincible sold well) so..this 'Michael' is controversial..so it will sell boatloads of copies.

that's a lot like Teddy Riley claiming that Michael was controversial, so Teddy's gunna be controversial on twitter, and all the people arguing with teddy's 'gonna make me famous'..is what Teddy said. sounds like he's longing for MJ-level fame, though Riley had some of his own fame. apparently, he doesn't think it was enough, though. cus everybody wants MJ-level fame(and sales).

but MJ's the only one who owns that, forever. and always did. cus his is genuine.
 
Last edited:
144 said:
sp when do i get big enough, as a coporation, to look as if i'm testing my product, with what LOOKS like independent people, although i didn't objectively secure the opinions of EVERY person that worked musically with MJ...just the ones that look like they
emphatically agree with me?
Click to expand...

legally speaking opinions of the people worked with Michael doesn't mean that much - sure it shows a good faith attempt but if this goes the court the outcome would depend on the forensic audiologist reports.

they are the third party independent people who uses established ways to determine the authenticity.

144 said:
it's curios that the mother and children didn't think this was MJ's voice on the track. they're supposed to have the most to gain, from this project.
Click to expand...

why do you think they think it's not Michael? It's only written by TMZ and Roger Friedman and you are the last person to believe the "media". I haven't personally seen any confirmation from 3T or Randy that Katherine or the children thinks this way as well. So why do we think that's what they think? (and side note : as beneficiaries they had the grounds for a lawsuit or to stop the project so they don't have to think they can act as well)
 
ivy said:
legally speaking opinions of the people worked with Michael doesn't mean that much - sure it shows a good faith attempt but if this goes the court the outcome would depend on the forensic audiologist reports.

they are the third party independent people who uses established ways to determine the authenticity.
Click to expand...

...and at the end of the day, all that any third party independent analyst can offer is an opinion. We still have no idea exactly what sort of analysis was done - what was the methodology? spectral analysis, fast fourier transforms, phoneme matching? who knows? One would imagine that if the analyst's opinion was that conclusive, the estate would release the analyst's report.
Methink the estate and sony doth protest too much
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top