Some artists should be seen, NOT heard.

[Tonysounds]

[video:youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7z06NISh-NY&feature=share

[Mike Warren]

I'm pretty sure that's fake. There are a lot of those fake videos doing the rounds now.

[stillplaying]

I'm pretty sure that's fake. There are a lot of those fake videos doing the rounds now.

 

Maybe. Not disagreeing with you - interested to know why you're so sure it's a fake.

 

Singing along with yourself at this type of show has been common for years.

 

Sound On Sound (UK) has published interviews with the engineers responsible for getting the public good value. The fans expect a big dance thing and singing. Tall order for anyone.

[Bridog6996]

I always just assumed the vocals were canned. There's really no way that anyone, even the most talented of singers, could sound good singing while also constantly running around busting out dance moves like these pop performers do. It's not even about talent, really, just the physicality of it.

[JpScoey]

There's really no way that anyone could sound good singing ...

while also constantly running around busting out dance moves...

So what's it to be? - singer? (errm - NO), dancer? (seen better in my local pub, so NO)

 

That leaves 'Jack of all trades, master of none'.

 

So 15,000 people pay a fortune to see someone who can neither sing or dance live - & walks away with a wad of cash.

Sound On Sound (UK) has published interviews with the engineers responsible for getting the public good value.

(tonysounds) Hitting "play" does not constitute live performance.

Maybe it's the guys who design the set/program the lighting/set off the fireworks,

 

& press buttons are who should be the one's getting the big bucks?

[Bridog6996]

Hey, I'm not saying it's the way it should be, just the way it is.

[Mike Warren]

I'm pretty sure that's fake. There are a lot of those fake videos doing the rounds now.

 

Maybe. Not disagreeing with you - interested to know why you're so sure it's a fake.

 

The sync doesn't look right in places.

 

Singing along with yourself at this type of show has been common for years.

 

Yes. I can't see how anyone can exert themselves that much and still sing constantly well. It seems the audience would rather have a "show" than a live music experience.

 

[JpScoey]

I'm pretty sure that's fake. There are a lot of those fake videos doing the rounds now.

Maybe. Not disagreeing with you - interested to know why you're so sure it's a fake.

The sync doesn't look right in places.

That's the whole point.

 

What you're hearing is the ACTUAL sound from the mic... as it happened.

 

The audience are not hearing that - what they hear is from backing tracks.

[Mike Warren]

What you're hearing is the ACTUAL sound from the mic... as it happened.

 

I understand that. I mean the sync of what we are hearing doesn't follow what she is doing. It should be perfect.

 

Anyway, it's certainly not important, and I could even be wrong. It has happened once before.

 

[JeffLearman]

The sync doesn't look right in places.

That's the whole point.

 

What you're hearing is the ACTUAL sound from the mic... as it happened.

 

The audience are not hearing that - what they hear is from backing tracks.

I think you need your coffee. If we're hearing what's coming from her mic then it should match her lips.

 

Regardless, what does it matter what she sounds like when she's lip synching? I wouldn't bother to sing my heart out and hit all the notes perfectly if nobody hears it. Would you?

 

What might be more interesting is to hear her sing live without AutoTune etc., and see how she really sounds. (Then again, that might not be so interesting! I need my coffee too.)

[JpScoey]

I think you need your coffee.

Yea... !

 

Regardless, what does it matter?... I need my coffee too.)

Fair point - let's move on, eh? !!!

[Synthoid]

I think you need your coffee.

 

http://www.dvorak.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/Starbucks-Cup-of-Joe-38022.jpg

[Dana.]

Some artists should be neither seen nor heard.

[CEB]

It is all downhill after 30.

[JpScoey]

It is all downhill after 30.

What???..... you mean it's going to get even WORSE?

[David Loving]

and everybody dog-piled Milli-vanilli.

[Ken Beaumont]

She's not a great singer, but she can sing without auto tune if shes not dancing too. She actually doesn't sound too bad if she isn't trying add too much malísimo and just sings a song straight. People want perfection just like the record, so the lip syncing is just giving the audience what it expects.

 

[video:youtube]

 

 

[ITGITC]

People want perfection just like the record, so the lip syncing is just giving the audience what it expects.

This ^.

 

Yup. It's the package.

 

It never has been about truth, justice and all that.

 

The acid test is this: Can a promoter put an act together where the majority of the audience leaves the show saying things such as - "WOW, that was worth it!" and "I had a great time!" and "Tickets weren't cheap, but that doesn't matter." and "So cool... TOTALLY!"

 

Lip syncing? It doesn't matter.

 

Faux body parts (breasts, butts, and baby bumps?) - No big deal.

 

Half a band playing live with the rest being backing tracks? - Who's gonna know?

 

Naaaaaah...

 

The only thing that matters is this:

 

Didja have a good time at the concert tonight, Bobby-Sue?

 

Tom

 

[Cygnus64]

There was a famous "we isolated the mic from the mixing board" tape of Linda McCartney years ago, singing the backup "Na Na Na Nas" in Hey Jude. WLS in Chicago played it non-stop until they got a cease-and-desist order. It was both funny and mean-spirited.

[Tonysounds]

Yes, and I have that recording on cassette: unfortunately for me, the only tape I had handy when I heard it was a SRV live radio broadcast that I did actually use! But honestly, totally worth it! Playing it endlessly was possibly mean-spirited, but the entertainment value was there. When anyone that puts themselves out there as a performer runs the risk of criticism. Its part of the price you pay for collecting the ticket price (and it was exorbitant, figuratively and literally).

 

As for this bit of tape, that mic track might not be from that particular video performance(s), but its irrelevant: As long as thats her voice, all criticisms are valid.

 

Yall.

 

[Cygnus64]

Yes, and I have that recording on cassette: unfortunately for me, the only tape I had handy when I heard it was a SRV live radio broadcast that I did actually use! But honestly, totally worth it! Playing it endlessly was possibly mean-spirited, but the entertainment value was there. When anyone that puts themselves out there as a performer runs the risk of criticism.

Yeah, I had it on cassette too. I see a bit of a difference between the two, possibly because Linda was a more likable figure (to me): one isn't misrepresenting themself. Britney is, Linda was not.

[ProfD]

I will NEVER understand why folks pay big bucks to listen to pre-recorded vocals and music at a live concert.

 

But, this foolishness isn't new. Live performances have been canned for decades because it's all about the show.

 

IMO, perfection is an honest performance rather than an artist doing a karaoke version of their hits. Attending a concert should be a "you had to be there" experience.

 

Sadly, it has been a long time since the average listener really cared about the quality of the music and/or performance. They just want to see and *hear* the star.

[Dave Pierce]

...one isn't misrepresenting themself. Britney is, Linda was not.

 

Nonsense. Britney isn't "misrepresenting" anything. Does the marketing for these shows say: "Come hear Britney sing, live, in real time, with a real band"? Of course not.

 

I'm not saying that I like the kind of show that she sells tickets to -- I don't. But people buy those tickets on purpose, knowing what the show is, and they like it. What's wrong with that?

 

--Dave

[CrimsonianKing]

Some artists should be neither seen nor heard.

 

Some people shouldn't be artists to begin with.

[JpScoey]

...one isn't misrepresenting themself. Britney is, Linda was not.

Nonsense. Britney isn't "misrepresenting" anything. Does the marketing for these shows say:

 

"Come hear Britney sing, live, in real time, with a real band"? Of course not.

No it doesn't,

 

but the marketing is a bit like the 'selective' quotes cherry-picked from the press by Hollywood to advertise movies.

 

ie: "if this is supposed to be the blockbuster movie of the year, as they claim, they are badly mistaken".

 

Becomes: "THE BLOCKBUSTER MOVIE OF THE YEAR" - New York Times.

 

I've no doubt the marketing for these shows says something like

 

'See Britney LIVE here on *such-a date*'.

 

So the whole thing is misrepresentation - ok, Britney is not dead, therefore seeing her 'live' is technically true.

...people buy those tickets on purpose, knowing what the show is, and they like it.

I disagree here.

 

Most of 'Joe Public' don't know the first thing about proper live music - they've been sold by the hype.

 

I bet if you questioned those people after the show, they would have no idea that it was not live singing.

 

Tricks like turning the mic on between songs, so she can interact with the audience is enough to fool most people.

[Cygnus64]

...one isn't misrepresenting themself. Britney is, Linda was not.

 

Nonsense. Britney isn't "misrepresenting" anything. Does the marketing for these shows say: "Come hear Britney sing, live, in real time, with a real band"? Of course not.

 

I guess I must be missing something. Does the marketing for your shows say that? Is there a band anywhere, in any solar system, in any universe, that says that??

 

I'm slow, so I'm just trying to keep up here: If someone says "concert" to you, does that mean:

 

1. A concert

2. Not a concert

 

People have been sued, AND LOST, due to this. Pavarotti was one, google it if you wish. What you're saying could apply to anything: The baseball team shows a movie because they didn't say it would be live. The actors in a play could lip-sync to "books on tape" because they technically didnt "say" they would be acting. The high-scale hooker could send in a blow-up doll because she didn't "say" it would be real.

 

She's misrepresenting herself big time, whether her fans know or even care. Wearing a headset mic is like having a ski lift pass on your jacket when you've never been on a slope in your life. It's not much different than tucking a salami in one's pants.

 

[Dave Pierce]

...one isn't misrepresenting themself. Britney is, Linda was not.

 

Nonsense. Britney isn't "misrepresenting" anything. Does the marketing for these shows say: "Come hear Britney sing, live, in real time, with a real band"? Of course not.

 

I guess I must be missing something. Does the marketing for your shows say that? Is there a band anywhere, in any solar system, in any universe, that says that??

 

I'm slow, so I'm just trying to keep up here: If someone says "concert" to you, does that mean:

 

1. A concert

2. Not a concert

 

People have been sued, AND LOST, due to this. Pavarotti was one, google it if you wish. What you're saying could apply to anything: The baseball team shows a movie because they didn't say it would be live. The actors in a play could lip-sync to "books on tape" because they technically didnt "say" they would be acting. The high-scale hooker could send in a blow-up doll because she didn't "say" it would be real.

 

She's misrepresenting herself big time, whether her fans know or even care. Wearing a headset mic is like having a ski lift pass on your jacket when you've never been on a slope in your life. It's not much different than tucking a salami in one's pants.

 

Reasonable points, I suppose.

 

And yet -- do we really think any of the people who buy tickets to her shows are shocked -- SHOCKED -- to learn that there is lipsyncing going on?

 

Maybe I'm overestimating the intelligence of that target market, I don't know. It's certainly not a target market that I interact with very much.

 

But I still think "misrepresenting" is a harsh term for what she does. She sells a mediocre, over-hyped, mass-market product to sheep. There is certainly plenty of THAT going around in this world.

 

--Dave

 

[JpScoey]

Maybe I'm overestimating the intelligence of that target market,

 

I think you are Dave

[Cygnus64]

 

 

 

Maybe I'm overestimating the intelligence of that target market, I don't know.

 

 

You are. More likely, it's our musician status that's driving that. We think everyone can figure it out. They can't. It's really surprising when someone is on TV faking to a heavily autotuned track and people don't know. Then again, they aren't looking at it in the way we are.

 

I bet someday, it will come out that a band like Kiss, Slipknot, Gwar et al did a gig and one of them was a stand-in, I have no doubt that it has happened.

[Joe Muscara]

1. The shows just list the artist name. What does it say on the marquee or billboard? "Britney Spears." There she is, as promised.

 

2. "Wearing a headset mic is like having a ski lift pass on your jacket when you've never been on a slope in your life." Actually, she does use the mic, when she talks between songs. That's live.

 

I'm not defending these things. In fact, I have no interest in these kinds of shows. I'm just saying.

 

I saw Peter Gabriel on the Us tour. If you saw it, you'll remember that it was very choreographed. But PG was clearly singing. I remember with one move where he jumped down from one level to another, you could hear him grunt as he hit while he sang. IIRC, for the encore, he started, then he stopped, and said, "that's what we musicians call 'a fuck up.'" Then he started it over and continued.

 

That's my kind of "show."