Michael Jackson Death Hoax Investigators
Latest News => Michael Jackson News => Topic started by: thevoice on November 09, 2010, 01:50:30 PM
-
Hi all,
It seems really strange to me that I listen to the son yesterday on MJ website and 100% I knew it was not him, the vocals quality and production was very poor and turn it off. We've been listing to him for so long we KNOW his voice.
Surprise, surprise today after listening to Teddy Riley interview confirming it is 100% Michael, I listen to the song again in MJ website and I instantly recognise his voice, accents, vibe. Today's version is the real MJ. The acapella version it's him.
That's the only way he can get the fans to doubt it's actually him and create a buzz..by realisng 2 version a fake and real one!!!
That's how MJ function create an illusion and tehn restore the truth...and the song just got enough controversy and online buzz to get it going...even Teddy Riley says at the end of the interview..we all love some controversy, Michael too
Happy to have your thought on this...
with LOVE,
-
is it really changed? In what sense? I didn't listen to it today on the website. Does someone have the yesterday version to compare to today's one?
-
what? a new version ? eeh :roll:
-
No, it's not. I just checked. same thing. Maybe it looked different to you because you dug more into it.
-
I'm listening right now on the official site, it's the same version.
-
If there are two version of Michael Jackson's Breaking News then that would actually make sense to me. Because there were two version of Michael Jackson breaking news on June 25/09. One where Michael dies, one where he fakes his death.
-
I wish I recorded it.I swear it sounds very different. I listed to it in depth yesterday before turning it off.
The pace was slower,a little off pitch , and most web comments yesterday people was saying Sony should get a Pitch pipe to tune in and I thought, well I am not the only one hearing a bad very bad tune.
it is possible fr Sony to alternate version on their website. And it might take only a very small differences here and there to alter voice and tone.
is it really changed? In what sense? I didn't listen to it today on the website. Does someone have the yesterday version to compare to today's one?
-
I hate to burst your bubble, but I downloaded the one originally posted on the website when it came out, and the one that's up there now is identical to it. Sorry. Whatever the case, neither one sounds like him. I have always had acute auditory senses and auditory memory, and I can tell you, they're the same, and sound nothing like the Michael Jackson that you know.
-
It's definitely the same version, hun.
I think it's Michael, the background vocals threw me off, after I listened to it acapella, I knew it was MJ. :D
-
I suspected this might happen actually, in a wild "what if..." brainstorm last night I thought what if... the version that plays when you hit click depends on a random draw. Is that why sometimes it takes forever to load? And you can only play it once? In order to replay you have to refresh. How come? So like, what if there were 2 versions, once with non-MJ sounding oice and the other with all MJ and which ever version you get to hear is the luck of the draw. Wouldn't that be a mind trick lol.
Or that as days passed, the version that is playing slowly "unmorphs" and by the end of the week it's all unaltered MJ voice start to finish.
That would explain why I'm finding broken links to the song around the internet, why some people think it sounds like MJ (??? this confuses me because what I hear sounds nothing like MJ at certain parts. I listened to the Acapella and clearly what they did was either: A. layer another voice on top of his in the middle of verses and swap back and forth mid stream MJ-imposter-MJ-imposter-MJ with clever and elaborate editing, or B. are deliberately digitally distorting his voice in and "in and out" pattern, like a fun house mirror effect, throughout the song, especially the beginning half. It's very odd. I don't have the knowledge of the industry to explain what I mean but I don't think I've heard this done in a song before and it sounds... distorted and artificial.) It also explains why Sony is SO quick to yank other versions on You Tube. I mean I know they are already like nazis but this is like lightning fast response time. As if someone was in charge of doing a search every hour for the material. Because comparisons could be made.
Also would explain why it's free and you can't buy it and have a million purchased copies all over to compare to the song that Breaking News is on Friday.
This would also explain why Sony is spreading "unofficial" statements viral saying that the song is not real MJ, that it's Jason Malichi, and they didn't know what was on it, and rushed it to release. That they are withdrawing it and reviewing the remaining tracks.
All a big Sony Ad campaign. If it is, it's an awfully genius one.
Or I'm just losing it.
-
@bec I totally agree with you.
I also pondered if they free single is not really Michael, but the actual Michael version would be on the album. But it is possible they are randomly switching between Michael and the other. It really is a brilliant plan.
About them purposely switching back and forth between Michael and the impostor is the same thing they did with the brilliant single Opis None. That too was switched between forward and reverse of the song at different parts throughout. I think the 2 minutes onward to the 10 mins mark, the parts of the song that are reversed, if played normally, just plays as the whole continuous song. There are the ambulance sirens and the messages only in the first 2 mins and the last 2 mins. It is a serious mind boggler.
-
I am seriously digging Opis None. Does anyone have any idea where I can download it? Seriously I would buy a whole album of that. I don't even like that genera but the MJ feel on it is great and infectious.
simalves, your post reminded me of a thought I heard someone mention, about how Breaking News got everyone running to demos and other examples of MJs voice and effectively reminded everyone of how amazing the real, genuine, authentic Michael Jackson is. He's best singer in the world.
TII sent everyone to old dance footage, and we all got reminded that he's the best dancer in the world...
I suspect that the upcoming unreleased video *may* inspire us to do the same?
-
@bec - In MP3 Format???
Forward
http://www.speedyshare.com/files/25044109/mforward.mp3 (http://www.speedyshare.com/files/25044109/mforward.mp3)
Reverse
http://www.4shared.com/audio/xSVZH2lI/mreverse.html (http://www.4shared.com/audio/xSVZH2lI/mreverse.html)
-
Hooray! Thanks simalves!!!
-
I suspected this might happen actually, in a wild "what if..." brainstorm last night I thought what if... the version that plays when you hit click depends on a random draw. Is that why sometimes it takes forever to load? And you can only play it once? In order to replay you have to refresh. How come? So like, what if there were 2 versions, once with non-MJ sounding oice and the other with all MJ and which ever version you get to hear is the luck of the draw. Wouldn't that be a mind trick lol.
Or that as days passed, the version that is playing slowly "unmorphs" and by the end of the week it's all unaltered MJ voice start to finish.
That would explain why I'm finding broken links to the song around the internet, why some people think it sounds like MJ (??? this confuses me because what I hear sounds nothing like MJ at certain parts. I listened to the Acapella and clearly what they did was either: A. layer another voice on top of his in the middle of verses and swap back and forth mid stream MJ-imposter-MJ-imposter-MJ with clever and elaborate editing, or B. are deliberately digitally distorting his voice in and "in and out" pattern, like a fun house mirror effect, throughout the song, especially the beginning half. It's very odd. I don't have the knowledge of the industry to explain what I mean but I don't think I've heard this done in a song before and it sounds... distorted and artificial.) It also explains why Sony is SO quick to yank other versions on You Tube. I mean I know they are already like nazis but this is like lightning fast response time. As if someone was in charge of doing a search every hour for the material. Because comparisons could be made.
Also would explain why it's free and you can't buy it and have a million purchased copies all over to compare to the song that Breaking News is on Friday.
This would also explain why Sony is spreading "unofficial" statements viral saying that the song is not real MJ, that it's Jason Malichi, and they didn't know what was on it, and rushed it to release. That they are withdrawing it and reviewing the remaining tracks.
All a big Sony Ad campaign. If it is, it's an awfully genius one.
Or I'm just losing it.
This totally makes sense. So similar to the TII movie how some theatre versions had changed details, even the DVD itself. Then the TII song, 2 versions and the whole business with Paul Anka. Doubles of everything? This is some wild and merry chase.
-
Guys, I went to michaeljackson.com just a minute ago and listened to "Breaking News" again... and I don't know what they did - but now it sounds MORE LIKE MICHAEL to me than 2 days ago! Check for yourself! :shock: :shock: :shock:
-
:shock: I hear it!!!! It IS DIFFERENT than on Monday.
BTW: I just listened to a few songs of Jason Malachi and feelingswise the voice matched the BN-Version from Monday. :shock: NOW it sounds like Michael.
EDIT: I even hear the background singing is even clearer than 2 days ago ... :shock:
OK going back into my padded cell ... *shaking heads*
-
I KNEW IT!! I SWEAR I FELT THE EXACT SAME THING!!!
I am glad I am not the only one noticing this...I felt I was just getting crazy for a minute. You can tell the production quality is even better. Intincts don't lie.
That would explain why some media even gave it a dreadful review, one saying it was not even worth releasing. Whereas the REAL version is clearly a hit!
Guys, I went to michaeljackson.com just a minute ago and listened to "Breaking News" again... and I don't know what they did - but now it sounds MORE LIKE MICHAEL to me than 2 days ago! Check for yourself! :shock: :shock: :shock:
-
I'm waving to you from MY padded cell!
Are we all crazy?? :shock: :shock:
-
Really, it's the same, but who was at first "This is not Michael" started to digg it better, in my opinion. I said since the very beginning that for me it's Michael but to my ears he sounds like he changed his voice on purpose. But honestly what made me be sure of it was the acapella version.
One thing I noticed since yesterday is that at a certain point the sound becomes clearer (pay attention) , as it would have been attached another recording of the song. This happens after the first chorus.
-
Waving back at you Susie! :D
Does anyone else notice a change in the sound and picture quality if you watch on MJ website? It goes from a blurry picture and sound quality to a clearer, louder and sharper picture and sound. It happens randomly around at 1.08, 1.14, 1.45, 2.20 ?
http://breakingnews.michaeljackson.com/UK/ (http://breakingnews.michaeljackson.com/UK/)
I'm waving to you from MY padded cell!
Are we all crazy?? :shock: :shock:
-
Waving back at you Susie! :D
Does anyone else notice a change in the sound and picture quality if you watch on MJ website? It goes from a blurry picture and sound quality to a clearer, louder and sharper picture and sound. It happens randomly around at 1.08, 1.14, 1.45, 2.20 ?
http://breakingnews.michaeljackson.com/UK/ (http://breakingnews.michaeljackson.com/UK/)
This is exactly what I was talking to my sister now. the sound and also the image becomes clearer after the first chorus. pay attention. As a different recording of the song would have been attached.
-
Exactly. What was that? I noticed last night while listening again on the site, that the sound suddenly changes to a clearer version at one moment.
-
Yes!!! Exactly what I saw and heard, the first day version for me was all flat, slow and blurry, today only parts are blurry. I thought my computer was playing up. It is just those very subtle differences made on purpose to create confusion...
One thing I noticed since yesterday is that at a certain point the sound becomes clearer (pay attention) , as it would have been attached another recording of the song. This happens after the first chorus.
-
I really don't remember if the night the song was published if it happened then too? I know I was so anxious to listen that for sure I don't remember if this happened that day too.
-
I saved the original version to make a comparison :P
But I must go now and travel 380 km... :cry: I'll be back at the computer on Thursday
-
I'm listening right now on the official site, it's the same version.
Yes it´s the same. 8-) :|
-
I'm listening right now on the official site, it's the same version.
same version as in lyrics.. but there is a pitch change.. and around 1.33 you can hear that they turn the "sound" up.... it wasn't there before.....
-
I'm listening right now on the official site, it's the same version.
same version as in lyrics.. but there is a pitch change.. and around 1.33 you can hear that they turn the "sound" up.... it wasn't there before.....
I noticed that last night while I went to listen the song again. The sound changes its pitch at some points, it becomes sharper/clearer/different at some moments. What is all that?
Did you guys save the song when it was first posted? I really don't remember if it was like this the night it was posted on the official site.
-
This gave me goosebumps. :|
-
Hi all,
It seems really strange to me that I listen to the son yesterday on MJ website and 100% I knew it was not him, the vocals quality and production was very poor and turn it off. We've been listing to him for so long we KNOW his voice.
Surprise, surprise today after listening to Teddy Riley interview confirming it is 100% Michael, I listen to the song again in MJ website and I instantly recognise his voice, accents, vibe. Today's version is the real MJ. The acapella version it's him.
That's the only way he can get the fans to doubt it's actually him and create a buzz..by realisng 2 version a fake and real one!!!
That's how MJ function create an illusion and tehn restore the truth...and the song just got enough controversy and online buzz to get it going...even Teddy Riley says at the end of the interview..we all love some controversy, Michael too
Happy to have your thought on this...
with LOVE,
that's a really good theory, thevoice. i do think it is possible! i rmb thinking distinctly that it didn't sound like MJ the first time i heard it, and couple of days later it seemed to sound different and more like MJ. or it could be my ears/mind playing tricks on me.
but definitely, if there are 2 different tracks, MJ has succeeded in garnering all the attention and controversy!
-
Well I love it and the version I've just listened to sounds like its all MJ.
-
I don't know what you guys are hearing, but I've listened to it about seven times over on the site by reloading the site and it all sounds the same.
-
OMG!! It DOES sound different today than on Monday! I only heard MJ on the acapella, now I hear him on both! :o :o :o :o
** Needs explanations!! :? :? :?
I LOVE YOU REAL MICHAEL! :D
-
OMG!! It DOES sound different today than on Monday! I only heard MJ on the acapella, now I hear him on both! :o :o :o :o
** Needs explanations!! :? :? :?
I LOVE YOU REAL MICHAEL! :D
I sense no difference in the voice. Just at some moments the sounds changes and it sounds clearer/sharper.
-
OMG!! It DOES sound different today than on Monday! I only heard MJ on the acapella, now I hear him on both! :o :o :o :o
** Needs explanations!! :? :? :?
I LOVE YOU REAL MICHAEL! :D
I sense no difference in the voice. Just at some moments the sounds changes and it sounds clearer/sharper.
Really?? :? Monday when I listened to it I was like "Oh no, this isn't Michael. Who is this? It can't be MJ :o" but now I hear it and I really think it's Michael
-
Probably because you've listened more and your mind got rid of the family's opinions that it's fake. I don't know...
I sense no difference in the voice.
-
It's the same track, it sounds different some times because of the way it is streaming and the quality jumps up and down depending on this, however the pitch, tone, instrumentation, vocals and sounds have not and do not change depending on how many times you listen to it.
You may think it sounds different after listening to the accapella version because your brain has adjusted to listen to particular features in the solo voice in the main track that you did not hear before. It is almost like making the vocal stand out more than before, but it still the same track.
This is why people doubted it was michael originally, listened to the accapella (which they believed was him) and now when they re-listen to it, say "it's michael now", they must have dubbed it in, (which they haven't, it's been there all along.)
It's just HIStory IN THE MIX
-
It's clear that some changes have been made to the song one version to confuse people and one to confirm
and the picture and sound changes from blurry to sharp are THE CLUE. I must admit I am very skeptical about some hoax theory and clues most of the time, but this one I actually experience it like many others.
The question is why? Clearly for media buzz. I expect there will be more to come with all the snippets release.
I firmly believe Mj and Sony are set to make this album number one BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY. All will be fairgame.
And of course the family are just playing by the rules. If only the fans said it wasnt MJ few would have paid attention, but if the family says it bring worlwide attention..
After all this is the first MJ material since Invicible. It has to come in with the usual controversy,
-Thriller (video controversy)
-Bad(light skin controversy)
-dangerous (black and white video cost controversy)
-History (the huge statue, the promo video, some lyrics)
-Invicible (short lived and Sony sucks campaign)
2010 Michael: I it really him or not.
with LOVE,
that's a really good theory, thevoice. i do think it is possible! i rmb thinking distinctly that it didn't sound like MJ the first time i heard it, and couple of days later it seemed to sound different and more like MJ. or it could be my ears/mind playing tricks on me.
but definitely, if there are 2 different tracks, MJ has succeeded in garnering all the attention and controversy!
-
I'm waving to you from MY padded cell!
Are we all crazy?? :shock: :shock:
I'm waving back, too! :lol:
-
It's clear that some changes have been made to the song one version to confuse people and one to confirm
and the picture and sound changes from blurry to sharp are THE CLUE. I must admit I am very skeptical about some hoax theory and clues most of the time, but this one I actually experience it like many others.
The question is why? Clearly for media buzz. I expect there will be more to come with all the snippets release.
I firmly believe Mj and Sony are set to make this album number one BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY. All will be fairgame.
And of course the family are just playing by the rules. If only the fans said it wasnt MJ few would have paid attention, but if the family says it bring worlwide attention..
After all this is the first MJ material since Invicible. It has to come in with the usual controversy,
-Thriller (video controversy)
-Bad(light skin controversy)
-dangerous (black and white video cost controversy)
-History (the huge statue, the promo video, some lyrics)
-Invicible (short lived and Sony sucks campaign)
2010 Michael: I it really him or not.
with LOVE,
but definitely, if there are 2 different tracks, MJ has succeeded in garnering all the attention and controversy!
This IS different. I heard BN only once on Monday. And yesterday, when i listened to it I had a complete, but COMPLETE different feeling. Yesterday I could say, Yep, THAT'S Michael. Maybe before it was also Michaels' voice but it must have been very distorted. :?
And if you go to the Twitter thread of Riley he even confirms it has been replaced. :shock:
-
BTW: The comments from Monday/Tuesday from visitors on MichaelJackson.com about how this is NOT MJ on BN are now ALL deleted but one. :lol:
C 4 yourself ;)
http://www.michaeljackson.com/ph/news/new-michael-jackson-song-breaking-news
-
BTW: The comments from Monday/Tuesday from visitors on MichaelJackson.com about how this is NOT MJ on BN are now ALL deleted but one. :lol:
C 4 yourself ;)
http://www.michaeljackson.com/ph/news/new-michael-jackson-song-breaking-news
" I love you MJ...I love everything about you... "
What does that suppose to mean? :?: :?
-
BTW: The comments from Monday/Tuesday from visitors on MichaelJackson.com about how this is NOT MJ on BN are now ALL deleted but one. :lol:
C 4 yourself ;)
http://www.michaeljackson.com/ph/news/new-michael-jackson-song-breaking-news
" I love you MJ...I love everything about you... "
What does that suppose to mean? :?: :?
To 'erase traces' so when someone gets there the 1st time, they will have no clue that the authenticity of MJs voice has ever been doupted. Practically a fresh start :lol: Because ALL other comments except the one you copied and maybe one other, were "No WAY, that's Michael!" :lol: Those 'responsible' for Michaeljackson.com, surely thought it was inappropriate to leave those comments on (No, it would've been honest :!: :roll: :lol:
-
BTW: The comments from Monday/Tuesday from visitors on MichaelJackson.com about how this is NOT MJ on BN are now ALL deleted but one. :lol:
C 4 yourself ;)
http://www.michaeljackson.com/ph/news/new-michael-jackson-song-breaking-news
" I love you MJ...I love everything about you... "
What does that suppose to mean? :?: :?
To 'erase traces' so when someone gets there the 1st time, they will have no clue that the authenticity of MJs voice has ever been doubted. Practically a fresh start :lol: Because ALL other comments except the one you copied and maybe one other, were "No WAY, that's Michael!" :lol: Those 'responsible' for Michaeljackson.com, surely thought it was inappropriate to leave those comments on (No, it would've been honest :!: :roll: :lol:
Lool now I get it! So every now and then, when someone post things like "No it can't be Michael" it will be remove? :?: So what if they remove it? People who gets there the 1st time will still doubt it. :lol: :lol: Everyone doubts it! :lol:
-
I don't know what you guys are on, but they are still identical! Please, someone give more detail on the supposed differences.
I even cleared my cache and the versions are still the same. :shock:
-
I can hear the difference :shock: This is so weird :shock:
-
This is very weird indeed. I listened to Breaking News I don't know how many times when michaeljackson.com put it up on Monday, and the thing is I agree with everyone that says this version sounds different; I can't exactly put my finger on why but it really does sound different atleast to me. I haven't heard the Acapella version either as every site I find it on the link is almost always broken (Or you have to pay first for the download).
This version fits in with what Mike sounds like in his other songs, when I first listened to Breaking News me and my brother both agreed that it wasn't Michael; this time though when I played it even he thought it was Michael, last time he said it sounded alot like Jason Malachi as I had played Because A Hero Fell right before I listened to Breaking News. I don't know whats going on, but if Michael is behind all this Breaking News Controversy...Then he's a genious. 8-)
-
Hi Makazradon,
Did you listen to the song on monday? To me and many other it was flat, out of pitch and you could have reasonable doubts or even be sure it was not Michael. on Tuesaay the production quality and clarity change, t..it's hard to explainn with words..it's just like seeing an MJ impersonator and the REAL MJ..you can tell the difference. Sorry if this is not of any help. But I am sure we'll get the fake version leaked at some point..it's too much fun for it not to happen
with LOVE,
I don't know what you guys are on, but they are still identical! Please, someone give more detail on the supposed differences.
I even cleared my cache and the versions are still the same. :shock:
-
Hi Makazradon,
Did you listen to the song on monday? To me and many other it was flat, out of pitch and you could have reasonable doubts or even be sure it was not Michael. on Tuesaay the production quality and clarity change, t..it's hard to explainn with words..it's just like seeing an MJ impersonator and the REAL MJ..you can tell the difference. Sorry if this is not of any help. But I am sure we'll get the fake version leaked at some point..it's too much fun for it not to happen
with LOVE,
I don't know what you guys are on, but they are still identical! Please, someone give more detail on the supposed differences.
I even cleared my cache and the versions are still the same. :shock:
Yes.
I even ripped it from the site on Monday. I listened to that one right after the one on the site. It sounds identical. It still sounds just like Jason Malachi.
Even the beginning when he says "Everybody wantin' a piece..." the way he says 'wanting' is like, 'wah'in'. So non-Michael. :?
-
Yep, there it is. Tweet confirmation. I can leave the mad house now...
There's even the blury/sharp picture and sound STILL happening. A producer of Teddy Riley's magnitude will not let that sort of mistake uncorrected, therefore this was done on purprose...
"@teddyriley1 I hear MJ now in Breaking News, did they replace it with a new version?
@mjjrules YES I DID.
He did what?! He changed the version that's on the site? "
And if you go to the Twitter thread of Riley he even confirms it has been replaced. :shock:
-
Oh. I'm pretty sure this version needs to stay on the whole week. Give everyone ample opportunity to hear it for themselves.
Because it still needs to hit mainstream media. And it will. Non-believers are discussing *as we speak* ways to alert the media to "Sony's raping of MJ's legacy" :shock:
The more I think about it, the more I think this version will stand as it is. If a "real" version shows up, with unaltered vocals, it will be after the 14th or on the album.
-
Why doesn't something so obvious alert more fans or media?
I understand even better the meaning of the blurry/sharp change in the song. It has to be together because if you just rely on the sound you can't really tell there' s a change in teh music but if the picture also changes, it gives you a clear signal that you are not making a mistake, there is something happening behind the scenes...
Oh. I'm pretty sure this version needs to stay on the whole week. Give everyone ample opportunity to hear it for themselves.
Because it still needs to hit mainstream media. And it will. Non-believers are discussing *as we speak* ways to alert the media to "Sony's raping of MJ's legacy" :shock: .
-
sHE OR HE IS RIGHT^^ I WAS PERSONALLY WAS PROABLLY THE FIRST TO HEAR THE SONG, i WAS REFRESHING THE PAGE TILL IT SHOWED AND THE SECOND IT DID i PALYED AND RECORDED IT, i HAD THE FIRST VIDEO ON YOUTUBE OF THE SONG, BUT IT GOT REMOVED, I JUST LISTEND TO TEH AUDIO AND IT'S NOT THE SAME AS THE ONE THATS CURRENTLY PUBLIC
-
OMGOMGOMGOMGOMSODFMADFLjl:kgjlks:jdg
sHE OR HE IS RIGHT^^ I WAS PERSONALLY WAS PROABLLY THE FIRST TO HEAR THE SONG, i WAS REFRESHING THE PAGE TILL IT SHOWED AND THE SECOND IT DID i PALYED AND RECORDED IT, i HAD THE FIRST VIDEO ON YOUTUBE OF THE SONG, BUT IT GOT REMOVED, I JUST LISTEND TO TEH AUDIO AND IT'S NOT THE SAME AS THE ONE THATS CURRENTLY PUBLIC
No shit.
Tell me you have the copy you made and uploaded to youtube.
-
Okay I think I know when this was done. After waking up the next day I went to the MJ website to hearit again becuase I could not familarize my self with it, and the player said it's currently unaviable to later in the day it was once again available
-
OMGOMGOMGOMGOMSODFMADFLjl:kgjlks:jdg
sHE OR HE IS RIGHT^^ I WAS PERSONALLY WAS PROABLLY THE FIRST TO HEAR THE SONG, i WAS REFRESHING THE PAGE TILL IT SHOWED AND THE SECOND IT DID i PALYED AND RECORDED IT, i HAD THE FIRST VIDEO ON YOUTUBE OF THE SONG, BUT IT GOT REMOVED, I JUST LISTEND TO TEH AUDIO AND IT'S NOT THE SAME AS THE ONE THATS CURRENTLY PUBLIC
No shit.
Tell me you have the copy you made and uploaded to youtube.
Yes I do, I have the video, and the audio saved on my computer
-
Upload it again, then link us right away so we can hear it before it gets pulled.
Or put it on Facebook. Sony can't remove stuff on there.
-
I downloaded the song right on the day it was released. Now I am playing back on the website and from the one i have in iTunes and I still can't hear a difference.
What exactly am i supposed to be listening for instead of voice changes and if anyone can be more specific with the times the voice sounds different in the song for further inspection, that would be much appreciated.
-
Instincts don't lie. :D
I hope you can send us a link mjjamm.
thanks,
sHE OR HE IS RIGHT^^ I WAS PERSONALLY WAS PROABLLY THE FIRST TO HEAR THE SONG, i WAS REFRESHING THE PAGE TILL IT SHOWED AND THE SECOND IT DID i PALYED AND RECORDED IT, i HAD THE FIRST VIDEO ON YOUTUBE OF THE SONG, BUT IT GOT REMOVED, I JUST LISTEND TO TEH AUDIO AND IT'S NOT THE SAME AS THE ONE THATS CURRENTLY PUBLIC
-
Harvey from TMZ has confirmed that there is a "more produced" version of Breaking News.
http://www.tmz.com/2010/11/12/michael-j ... sic-album/ (http://www.tmz.com/2010/11/12/michael-jackson-song-akon-came-back-to-finish-breaking-news-sony-music-album/)
"As for "Breaking News," I just heard the finished version. It's more produced than the one Sony put online and sounds more classic MJ."
-
http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/content_ ... f=nf&imw=Y (http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/content_display/industry/e3i7fd4195ba1b2a846ab0d1a1450ab0823?ref=nf&imw=Y)
Sony: New Michael Jackson Album Could Sell 400,000 In First Week
November 11, 2010 - Retail
By Ed Christman
The initial U.S. shipment of Michael Jackson’s "Michael," due Dec. 14 on Epic Records, is 900,000, according to retail sources. Sony is projecting first-week CD sales of 340,000 and digital album sales of 60,000. That projection is similar to debut-week sales of Jackson's album "This Is It," though that album had the marketing strength of a major motion picuture behind it. "This Is It" sold 373,000 units in its first week and has sold 1.6 million units since its release in October 2009, according to Nielsen SoundScan.
Second week projections for "Michael," are set at 280,000 units, while digital sales are expected to slip from its debut week percentage of 15% to 8%. But both of those percentages are better than the digital sales garnered by "This Is It" in its first week when the format accounted for 5.6% of total sales.
"Michael" will carry a $10.25 wholesale cost and a $13.98 list price.
Most music merchants say the controversy surrounding the posthumous single "Breaking News" should stoke awareness and sales for the new album "Michael."
"I think people will come out to buy the album, especially with the controversy," Edge Entertainment Distribution music buyer Danny Cohen says.
The debate on song quality and authenticity will likely be a moot point by Nov. 15, when the Jackson website is scheduled to debut "Hold My Hand," which features Akon. That first commercially available single from "Michael" will be available for sale the same day at digital stores like iTunes.
Some merchants worry that the quality of the first song being streamed from Jackson's site may not inspire consumers to run out and buy the set on street date. One merchant described "Breaking News" as "an interesting choice to sell an album. It's not a good first look for the album."
Merchants say that Sony sales representatives have told them the single was chosen more because of the lyrical content as a way to herald the news about the upcoming album.