Age mixup again - 14ish in 1974?
simalves
Posts: 730
It is a well known fact that boys' voices change when they are around 14 years old. Their voices crack and singers are usually advised not to strain their vocal chords at this time to avoid them spoiling their vocal cords completely.
Here is a video of Michael performing in 1974 when his voice was undergoing this change. I know boys can change earlier like at maybe 12 or so - but would his voice really be changing at 16????
[youtube:3pm5ujm1]
Here is a video of Michael performing in 1974 when his voice was undergoing this change. I know boys can change earlier like at maybe 12 or so - but would his voice really be changing at 16????
[youtube:3pm5ujm1]
Comments
Look at Justin Bieber. He's 16 and he's barely beginning to undergo the gradual process of puberty regarding his voice.
This is 1973 and his voice is fine
Just watch the difference between Mike and Randy, who is born October 29, 1961. Is there 1 year and 9 months in between, or 3 years? There is not much difference, besides the changing voice. A difference between 16 and 13 would have been visible IMO, but 14 and 12/13 not so much.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."[youtube:3jsmcq3l]
I rewatched the first vid and I see I mixed up Randy and Marlon at one point, I didn't watch the whole vid the first time. Randy is very tiny for a 13-year-old. <!-- s:shock: -->:shock:<!-- s:shock: -->
I always found it very difficult to guess Mike's age at every moment in his life, maybe because he looked way more mature than he really was when he was little, and so much younger when he got older. When I look at some BAD-era pictures I find it hard to believe that's a 30-year-old. I know some people just are blessed and look younger than they really are and that men in particular never grow up and some even look adorable at 75 while we have to tape our skin together and paint our faces to look a little representative at that age, but I hope you know what I mean. In the first vid he looks more like a 14-year-old than a 16-year-old to me when I compare him with boys that age when I was in highschool, despite of his long legs. I know that was in the early 90's instead of the 70's, but nevertheless I get that with many pictures and videos from the early days. And I can't get the fact out of my head that in the Jacksons - An American Dream, Katherine gets pregnant with Mike in 1959. That movie was made in the early 90's, so everyone knew Mike's age and birth year, I am certain Jermaine of all people wouldn't make that error.
Mikes age and length seem to be a mystery. Older/younger, tall/short... Michael Jackson's big optical illusion....
Straight jacket anyone? <!-- s
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."I knew you would be interested in this.
I got the link from many vocal related sites. They were discussing Michael's vocal range and how his 14th year was a difficult time for him because of the voice break and how he acquired more notes after the voice break and still kept his younger notes as well. It was quite interesting but I don't think I could post their comments here so I did not even save the links to those sites. There were about 4 different forums and all said his voice broke at 14. This video was supposedly him trying not to strain his vocal chords at that delicate time.
I am also wondering if the publicised fact that Motown told him to lie about his age and seem younger was actually just fiction and whether his actual DOB was in 1960. Or did the movie try to keep up with Motown's lie and so said he was born in 1960. Maybe someone should ask Jermaine on twitter.
That wouldn't make sense. The movie was released after Mike's book Moonwalk, so people already knew his DOB. Also, the pr-move to 'lie' about his age was explained in the movie.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."Thaffa lotta errors... <!-- s
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."Maybe that's the point of this whole thing. I mean ever since Michael was a boy everyone has had their own preconceived notions about him and his life. Maybe what he is trying to tell us is to take a look back so that we will be able to see that beneath the man everyone thought they knew was a real person; one whom we have yet to discover <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D -->. But don't let it get you down for I am sure that doubting your own preconceived notions is a sure sign that you are heading in the right direction.
I understand what you're getting at. I've spent the past few months looking beyond the 'entertainer' and discovering what I thought was the real person, but now I'm questioning whether he really wants to be 'discovered', whether he really wants the world to see the real him. He seems to have spent his life hiding it, acting a part, surrounding himself in mystery and illusion, and now we can't even agree on something as basic as his true age, because of strange inconsistencies. We don't even know what he really looks like, what with make-up, wigs and, dare I mention them, doubles. We question his marriages, his children, his family, every tiny facet of his life and being and yet we get no closer to knowing the man. To be honest I'm not even sure I can trust what I've heard him say with his own lips, because I don't know how much has been part of his 'show', his 'illusion', and not the real him at all.
He may have left the King of Pop behind, but his death hoax is just a different form of mystery, illusion, confusion and 'performance'. He's still holding back, giving us only what he wants to, keeping his distance, metaphorically as well as physically. If that's the way he wants it to be, so be it, it's probably actually the way most of us live our lives, few of us are 'open books', so it's fine. If I feel sad that that makes him a stranger in my eyes, that's my problem, not his.
I don't want to scrutinise him any more. I don't know him at all and I'm realising I probably never will. When you said I am 'heading in the right direction', I don't know if you meant 'closure', but that's kind of what it feels like.
I disagree. He might have started using doubles way more after the BAD era and used make-up to change his features, but we have seen him as well. I don't think we have seen him much since 2001 though.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."If MJ (and family members or others) lied about his age for a while, then 1960 was the lie - not 1958! If Michael had been born in 1960, then saying he was born in 1958 would have made him look OLDER, not younger. I truly believe he was born in 1958.
Sorry, Truthprevails, but I am convinced it was just the other way round.
Besides my own memory (born in 1959 I used to live with the impression that MJ was younger than I am - and in teenage years that matters a lot!). And all the bios - especially Adrain Grant`s - are quite vague about the early years.
I am even more convinced after I saw this cover of "Rolling Stone Magazine" - published in April 1971
<!-- m -->http://s12.bdbphotos.com/images/150x200<!-- m --> ... sieiei.jpg
showing little MJ and asking what an "11 year old has to do after bedtime".
That might be the reason why they actually did NOT lie about his true age in the first place but had to make him older later in order to avoid trouble with the child`s labour acts (the age of twelve used to be relevant to the question of how many hours a day a child was allowed to work - even and especially in the entertainment industry).
To cover up the whole thing they later claimed that MJ had to "lie about his age" since Motown supposedly "made him younger". Of course they had to explain it somehow ...
Yes, indeed he had to lie about his true age ... being forced to behave "older" than he actually was.
Wouldn`t it be confusing for a little boy to pretend to be more mature than he was able to due to his real age?
And isn`t that "childhood had been totally taken away - or even stolen - from him" as he bitterly claimed all the time?
For me, it all makes perfect sense. As he stated in Moonwalker: "My adolescence problems messed up my whole personality" ... but given these additional circumstances wouldn`t it be more than understandable for him to develope a kind of disturbed self-concept?
For more proof please do some picture comparisons throughout his adolescense and youth.
<!-- m -->http://www.allposters.com/-sp/Michael-J ... 63038_.htm<!-- m -->
I always thought that little Michael was younger than they'd been telling us. Looooong before the hoax. But finding the real date of his birth seems important in relation to the numerology of the hoax. If the 1958 year was fake, all the documentation stating his date of birth would have been fake too?! Considering the Joe/Joseph issue, this would get even crazier. Really don't know what to think of it... <!-- s:roll: -->:roll:<!-- s:roll: -->
Anyhow, the younger brother Randy is said to have been born on 29 Oct. 1961. Maybe we can compare old photos/videos with him and MJ to see how much older Michael appears to be (than Randy)? This would be, as I said, a possible indication, but not hard evidence...
Here are some Jackson 5 (or rather 6) interviews from 1974:
[youtube:1s5wzgzi]
[youtube:1s5wzgzi]
Here's also a beautiful Michael interview from 1974 (with questions from fans) which I just discovered:
[youtube:1s5wzgzi]
Do you think MJ is only 1.5 yr older than Randy? I believe he appears older than that...
And BTW, the Michael interview from 1974 really makes me think of the older Michael, and how it's really the same person... The same mannerisms, way of speaking & holding the mike, etc.
About the age: I actually think that in the last video Mike does look his age (16).
"We used to have a pit bull for quite a while, and one day it tore from his kennel. Michael, he was just six years old, and his two years younger brother Randy were playing in front of the house, and the dog ran directly towards them. Michael was on top of the car roof with just one jump, Randy was bitten in the Achilles tendon, which still causes him problems. By then it was clear: Michael is moving like just no other."
For the whole interview look at <!-- l -->viewtopic.php?f=59&t=11180&start=0<!-- l -->
Yes we had, and even far before the 1960's.