In Reply to: CUT........................... posted by Todd Krieger on June 11, 2012 at 22:18:18:
>> You're distorting Mike's original statement...... He said 95 percent of live *pop* music is either lip-sync'ed or played back....... I'm not sure if it's actually that high, but I'm certain it is high nonetheless.>>
That's nice. Since when has any of the examples I used to rebut his assertion fallen out of the general category of pop?
What exactly is "high?" some might see 1% as high.
>> Personally, if I thought he exaggerated the number, which might be the case, I'd maybe question the number....... But IMO, he's nailed the problem with most popular music today, exaggerated or not.>>
"The problem?" really this is "he" problem?
Either you think he exaggerated the number or you don't think he exaggerated the number. Which is it. I think he pulled it out of his ass and it is way off.
>>From me personally, what I find disappointing is the militant attitude from those either defending or denying the practice of faking performance.......>>
And who here is actually doing that? Smells like a burning straw mane to me.
>> And it's about time the few real music critics remaining developed a backbone and started going on the offensive........ As far as I'm concerned, the inmates have been running the asylum. For too long.>>
As far as I am concerned it's funny when one inmate calls another inmate crazy in any asylum.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Since when is 95% a distortion of 95%? - Analog Scott 22:35:12 06/12/12 (4)
- When the Context Is Changed.............................. - Todd Krieger 17:26:10 06/13/12 (2)
- RE: When the Context Is Changed.............................. - Analog Scott 20:58:13 06/13/12 (1)
- Fine - Whatever - Time To Move On [nt] - Mike Porper 08:29:15 06/14/12 (0)
- 115% - Mike Porper 08:07:29 06/13/12 (0)