|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
192.42.240.245
"Musicians with the London Symphony Orchestra are reportedly going to have to pull a Milli Vanilli when they appear at the opening ceremony of the Summer Olympic Games in London.".......
Follow Ups:
The Vancouver Symphony Orchestra (VSO) was asked to "fake it" for the opening and closing ceremonies of the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympics. They refused.
Given that the ceremony is optimized for TV viewers, why not just have them perform offsite?
I think that's a fine idea. The find the organizers' plan to be objectionable. I also think that if they -- the organizers -- really wanted to do justice to the music, they could, at no small expense, rig up a sound system that would work just fine. I once heard U-2 at the huge old Denver Broncos stadium and the music actually sounded quite good.
Observe, don't think
Almost no popular music's played "live" anymore. None. All of those musicians and singers you see performing - anywhere, at anytime - have the little that they do play routed via a mixer to a laptop, or other hard drive, where pre-recorded music is mixed in and predominant. Pitch correction, wrong note correction, echo, delay, effects, much or all of the music being "played" - everything - everything! - is mixed in.While those people are bouncing and dancing and pretending to play instruments on stage, the computer's arranging and mixing the feeds to present a percentage pre-recorded/live mix. Usually, it's 75/25 - that's 75% pre-recorded, 25% live.
All so-called R&B acts, such as Gwen Stefani, Madonna, etc., are often 100% pre-recorded. All the music you hear is pre-recorded. All they do is dance around and pretend to sing.
It amazes me how gullible and downright stupid [yes, stupid!] the public is. Technology to play pre-recorded vocal harmonies in concert has been around since 1979. 1979! Queen used it. Since then, almost nobody ever takes the chance of singing vocal hamony live. Why?
#1 - it's hard to do.
#2 - usually all of the singing's overdubbed by the lead singer in the studio. The other guys can't sing a lick.It amazes me how the average non-classical, non-jazz listener fails to realize all of this, even when I've taken them literally by the hand in these so-called concerts, and had the mixing engineer reveal to then how it's all done. People continue to disbelive, and in some cases react with anger and violence. I've had that kind of reaction even here, on the pop boards. It's almost like religion to people. I don't get it.
Edits: 06/04/12
95%. Nonsense. I worked on a TV show for 7 years that had live acts come in and play. Only three of them lip synced and one of the three didn't know it. I have been to hundreds of rock concerts over the years and not one of them was lip synced. It's easy to tell.
By the way, Gwen Stefani, seen her once at the Billboard music awards. She definitely did not lip sync. I know, I saw the sound check.
Lots of pop acts use recordings rather than live bands to back them, but then they often don't have a live band on stage anyway. In some cases a live band will be on stage and mixed very low as he says, in other cases the band is heard, but his 95% numbers are ridiculous. Many singers sing live, backup singers included. I know some do it taped, the numbers are nonsense.
Obviously, I can't speak of your television program, although, I rather doubt the truth about your statement, since TV producers are extremely cautious about having any slip ups; hence, they'll always go for a sure thing, rather than risk something as unpredictable and unstable as a live performance. Here's an example for you: this thread. Read the head post.Fake ["lip synched"} performances on television are standard. Whitney Houston's singing of the national anthem here in the United States of America prior to the opening of the Super Bowl a few years back just pops into mind.
What many popular bands do, and have done for some time, is to allow the lead singer to sing live. All of the back-up vocals are pre-recorded and mixed in, as has been the rule for decades, going back to the late 70s, as I've mentioned. Depending on the band, the rest of the sound may be fake [pre-recorded], partially live [some actual playing on stage, with pre-recorded support computer synched and mixed in], or mostly live [rare these days].
Most so-called R&B acts are mostly faked in live performance. As are many others. It never fails to both amuse and anger me when see a Celtic Woman so-called "live" performance, where the violin player lady is running, jumping, skipping, hopping, and joyfully bounding across the stage ---all while continuing to play violin.
Running and playing violin!!!! Read that sentence again.
I used to play violin. It's a delicate instrument. You can't move much while doing it, cause the bow will just loose contact with the strings. You may watch the country bands that have violin players [still actually playing live] and note that even when they move while playing, it very restricted. Mostly, they just sway. It's physically imposible to play the instument while moving much. Forget running. Bounding. Hoping. Jumping.
Yet, there she is, Celtic Woman, running, skipping --- while the music from her violin pours out without even the slightest scrape. Scrape: something any violin player knows, can occur even if you're standing still and concentrating.
Lot's of popular music's still played fully live in local bars across the country. But, in an amazing number of them, technology driven semi-live has also taken over. In one such venue I listened to a rock band without any singers play with a singer and full harmony vocals. The singing was in perfect synchrony with the playing. Why? Cause vith voltage triggers, there're no timing issues. The band had the vocals pre-recorded, packed on the hard drive controling the entire performance, and voltage triggers set every song in motion.
None of this is new or shocking. Any street corner musician [anyone, you, me, anyone]can buy pre-recorded material on a thumb drive, plug it into their amp, then plug in their own instrument, any play with a full band...that isn't actaully there. And, you may go into any big city and find scores of street musicians doing just that. For some odd reason, you seem to want to deny the reality happening right in front of you.
Edits: 06/07/12
I've seen it innumerable times. Regards,
J.R.
Firstly, most of the pop/rock defensive responses have been pretty much what I've always gotten from pop/rock listeners: denial at all costs.May I suugest that what you should be doing is taking a skeptical look, a questioning inquiry into how much of the pop music you follow live really is live, instead of going into defensive auto-pilot mode. Not all politicians are corrupt, but are going to ignore the crooks because you can find some honest ones?
Concerning violin playing, I said this, exactly:
"the violin player lady is running, jumping, skipping, hopping, and joyfully bounding across the stage ---all while continuing to play violin".
Running.
Your E-Euro guy doesn't do that. I watched your U-Tube video. Firstly, thanks for making me suffer through that Eastern European idea of popular music [more on that, below]. Your fiddler doesn't ever run AND play. He holds the instrument in the manner of a country fiddler [tight against his chest]. He moves around a lot, but mostly in a swaying, stalking swoop. At one point he does actually break into a run [why? who knows?], but that's when he's not playing at all. But, his type of stalking, swooping movement wasn't what I was talking about.
And, he mostly plays 3 closely spaced notes; not hard to do. With his amplified instrument, he's not concerned about beauty of tone, and he didn't bother with any vibrato in this sequence, which would've been much harder to do.
Fiddlers have been doing this sort of swooping movement thing for decades. Long before these Eastern Euros stumbled onto this stuff, country fiddler Doug Kershaw was doing it far better.
Finally, I'm about to say something that I probably shouldn't, but, what the hell. You may like and love this sort of music. That's great. I respect your freedom to choose anything you want as an object of admiration. OTOH, I have the same freedom. And, the right to extend my opinion.
I'm subjected to pop music from E. Europe on a regular basis [against my will]. IMHO, it's amazing how bad it is. The U-Tube attached here is far, far from the worse of it. But, it's pretty bad. Listen to it. It's nothing other than a really poor imitation of early 70's jazz rock, but without the either the musical inspiration or the technical virtuosity. As is always, always, always the case with these E-Euros, you get the sense that they went ga-ga over anything that filtered their way from the West, and they slavishly copy all of it, but without any insight or originality. Again, IMO. But, you insisted on sticking the video for me to see; so, there it is.
> > Firstly, most of the pop/rock defensive responses have been pretty much what I've always gotten from pop/rock listeners: denial at all costs.> .
You are still just making crap up here. Do you think by just saying things that they magically manifest into actual reality?
> > May I suugest that what you should be doing is taking a skeptical look, a questioning inquiry into how much of the pop music you follow live really is live, instead of going into defensive auto-pilot mode.> >
Dude, do you understand what a sound check actually is? If so how on earth can you make such a dumb ass suggestion.
It's impossible to get through to you. You seem to be one of those people who never stop unless you have the upper hand, at all costs, right or wrong.Here's something that should make you proud and satisfied:
All pop/rock music played in live performance in 100% live. That One Hundred Percent live. Always, everywhere, at all times. It's always heen that way. It'll always be that way. Sound checks prove it, because there's never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever a mixing of live plus computer hard drive pre-recorded sounds. Ever. That never ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever happens. It's fiction, "pulled out of somebody's ass". Rock is all live, always, everywhere, at all times.
When you hear a singer's voice sing harmony in three or four parts with him or herself and sound just like the studio recording - that's live too! It's all live. Rock singers have the ability to single in many voices, simultaneously. They can double, triple, and quad their voices [an old studio trick]. It's all live. It's in the sound check. There it is. Always live. 110%.
That's right. 100% + 10%, live. Better than live. Super live. So live, we're not worthy of it.
I stood on a street corner in Phoenix, in an area saturated with nightclubs. A jazz guitarist was playing on the corner. He was pretty good. He was playing an electric guitar. He went through his "sound check", strumming, turning knobs, adjusting this and that, more strumming, adjusting reverb, EQ, delay, etc. Sound check.
Then, he started to play. From his speakers, the moment he started playing, a full jazz combo played also. Tenor sax, piano, bass, drums. Vibes, on some pieces.
I knew that they were all live. Yes. Yes, YES YES YES. All of those musicians were right there, live, playing in person, right there, on the street corner. The Bass, the drummer, the sax, the piano, the vibraphone. Live live live live live live. I just couldn't see them, and nobody else could, either. But, they were live. I know they were. All music is always live, always, everywhere, at all times. 100% live. 110% live. Oh, professional wrestling - that's real, too.
Edits: 06/13/12
But beauty is.
J.R.
But, I've already said I considered the discussion over; argued to death. Yet, Mr. Scott continues with his aggressive, winner-take-all posts. Somebody has to stop. It's boring. I think everyone's had enough of the one-upsmanship. We should be sharing music information and our enjoyment of it, not shouting at each other [and turing this board into a pissing contest].
Thanks for your completely true and sane post.
Like this. Must be your lucky day. Regards,
J.R.
> > Obviously, I can't speak of your television program, although, I rather doubt the truth about your statement,> >
At least you are being consistant in forming opinions without facts.
> > since TV producers are extremely cautious about having any slip ups; hence, they'll always go for a sure thing, rather than risk something as unpredictable and unstable as a live performance. Here's an example for you: this thread. Read the head post.> >
Really? Do tell us what TV producers have confided in you and gave you this insight as to how they think.
> > Fake ["lip synched"} performances on television are standard. Whitney Houston's singing of the national anthem here in the United States of America prior to the opening of the Super Bowl a few years back just pops into mind.> >
And this would be a classic logical fallacy. You cherry pick your data and then draw sweeping universal conclusions.
> > What many popular bands do, and have done for some time, is to allow the lead singer to sing live. All of the back-up vocals are pre-recorded and mixed in, as has been the rule for decades, going back to the late 70s, as I've mentioned.> >
Repeating the stuff that you make up doesn't make it any less made up. And you are making your numbers up.
> > Most so-called R&B acts are mostly faked in live performance. As are many others. It never fails to both amuse and anger me when see a Celtic Woman so-called "live" performance, where the violin player lady is running, jumping, skipping, hopping, and joyfully bounding across the stage ---all while continuing to play violin.> >
Now I just have to ask what concerts are you going to? In the many many many concerts I have gone to I have never encountered a Celtic woman playing the violin and skipping, hopping and joyfully bounding across the stage.
> > Running and playing violin!!!! Read that sentence again.> >
I already did read it again. Clearly we are not going to the same shows. I have seen Ian Anderson run around stage a bit and stop to play the flute. But it is quite clear that he is in fact actually playing live when he does it. That's about the closest thing I have seen to a Celtic woman hopping, bounding and dancing across a stage while playing a violin.
I used to play violin. It's a delicate instrument. You can't move much while doing it, cause the bow will just loose contact with the strings.
Ever see Joshua Bell? Or is it your position that he is faking it too?
> > You may watch the country bands that have violin players [still actually playing live] and note that even when they move while playing, it very restricted. Mostly, they just sway. It's physically imposible to play the instument while moving much. Forget running. Bounding. Hoping. Jumping.> >
Well, yeah. I saw Alison Krauss last year. There wasn't a whole lot of running jumping and dancing across the stage. Oh and there wasn't any lip syncing going on either. They were actually playing their music live. According to you they are in that rare 5%? really? 5%?
> > Yet, there she is, Celtic Woman, running, skipping --- while the music from her violin pours out without even the slightest scrape. Scrape: something any violin player knows, can occur even if you're standing still and concentrating.> >
I suppose if you transfix on this one weird odd ball show and ignore the thousands upon thousands of other live shows your numbers may start to seem believable. But that is what we call cherry picking. It leads to erroneous conclusions like 95% of the live acts are lip syncing in concert.
> > Lot's of popular music's still played fully live in local bars across the country. But, in an amazing number of them, technology driven semi-live has also taken over. In one such venue I listened to a rock band without any singers play with a singer and full harmony vocals. The singing was in perfect synchrony with the playing. Why? Cause vith voltage triggers, there're no timing issues. The band had the vocals pre-recorded, packed on the hard drive controling the entire performance, and voltage triggers set every song in motion.> >
And in the many bands I have seen at local dives and such I see folks actually playing live and singing live. Rebecca Pidgeon, Rocco Deluca, Sasha Masakowsky, Marny Herald are recent artists I have seen in such venues numerous times. They are clearly playing their stuff and singing their stuff live.
> > None of this is new or shocking. Any street corner musician [anyone, you, me, anyone]can buy pre-recorded material on a thumb drive, plug it into their amp, then plug in their own instrument, any play with a full band...that isn't actaully there. And, you may go into any big city and find scores of street musicians doing just that. For some odd reason, you seem to want to deny the reality happening right in front of you.> >
I guess I just avoid garden variety crap lounge acts and dancing Celtic violinists. If you have ever been to a sound check you know what is and is not live. I know what I am seeing.
The movie in which that line appeared is so true.
"I know what I am seeing."
Yes, you certainly do.
Also, I didn't say that musicians must be immobile the entire time they're on stage. What I said was that it's impossible to run AND play a violin at the same time. Running or dancing, then stopping to play a passage isn't the same thing.
"Rebecca Pidgeon, Rocco Deluca, Sasha Masakowsky, Marny Herald"
Jazz and jazz influenced musicians tend to play live. But they and their numbers are vastly swamped by the sheer quantity of what's popular today: Rap, techno, and R&B. There, "live" is a rare thing.
Finally, you don't seem to be familiar with Celtic Woman. They're quite popular. Check here:
http://www.celticwoman.com/
> > Also, I didn't say that musicians must be immobile the entire time they're on stage. What I said was that it's impossible to run AND play a violin at the same time.> >
I will take your word on the matter. However I have yet, in all my concert going, to see anyone running and playing a violin.
So I don't see how this is a point in support of your numbers. It is your numbers that I find completely contrived.
"Rebecca Pidgeon, Rocco Deluca, Sasha Masakowsky, Marny Herald"
Jazz and jazz influenced musicians tend to play live.
Rebecca Pidgeon and Marny Herald are much more folk than anything else. Rocco DeLuca is more blues.
> > But they and their numbers are vastly swamped by the sheer quantity of what's popular today: Rap, techno, and R&B. There, "live" is a rare thing.> >
Yeah ya keep sayin it but so far what you have is Whitney Houston at the superbowl and some Celtic chick running around playing a violin. You just aren't making a case for your numbers which I still say are completely made up. On our TV show we had several rappers and they all played live. absolutely no lip syncing. We have had R&B artists and again no lip syncing. The only acts that actually faked it on our show were Tatu, Bon Jovi (yep they lip synced) Jessica Simpson. And she didn't know she was lip syncing. She sang live but was fed a guide track in her headset so she could follow. She was having trouble doing the singing and dancing at the same time. They cut half the dance and thought they had everything under control. The live audience heard a mix of her live singing and the vocal guide track. The broadcast went out only with the prerecorded vocal guide track so it ultimately was lip syncing even though that was not the intent. the thirty some odd other acts that came on the show all sang live.
> > Finally, you don't seem to be familiar with Celtic Woman. They're quite popular. Check here:> >
I have not seen them live and am not interested. OTOH I have seen Clannad live and they did play their own music live in concert. It's easy to tell the difference.
Many of your statements, and those of the other pro, support what I've said. The percentages I used were off-the-cuff to make a point [no one's gone around actually compiling data on rock bands about this].
Your assertion was that 95% of live music was actually lip synced. And it does seem that you are now conceding that it was something you just made up. So thank you for finally conceding my point.
"Your assertion was that 95% of live music was actually lip synced."
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.
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.
From me personally, what I find disappointing is the militant attitude from those either defending or denying the practice of faking performance....... 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.
IMO, there is no better experience than live music. But it will become extinct if the practice of faking it and not disclosing it does not get cited for what it is.
> > 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.
95 percent of music being lip-synced is not the same as 95 percent of pop music being lip-synced or played back.............
> > 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?
You think it's *not* a problem? I think it's a terminal problem! A grave problem...... The entertainment is trying to pass faked music as real. That's not a 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.
A fair opinion....... You might be right..... But I think trying to split hairs over the details digresses to the fact it's a terminal problem. That's my point.
> > 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?
You think you're not actually doing that?
Smells like a burning straw mane to me.
So what is the reality, from your perspective? I'm open eyes and ears. Thank you.
> > > "The problem?" really this is "he" problem?> > >
> > You think it's *not* a problem? I think it's a terminal problem! A grave problem...... The entertainment is trying to pass faked music as real. That's not a problem??> >
Todd you talk about things being taken out of context. Certainly you understand the huge difference between saying something is "the" problem compared to saying something is "a" problem. Is it "a" problem? Depends on the circumstance. If it is a concert I payed to go see then yes it is a problem. If it is the national anthem at the superbowl then no, it is not a problem. Is it "the" problem? No, there is no one singular problem in music today. There are many problems of varying degrees.
> > > 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.> > >
> > A fair opinion....... You might be right..... But I think trying to split hairs over the details digresses to the fact it's a terminal problem. That's my point.> >
How is it splitting hairs? It is IMO an outrageous claim.
> > > > 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?> > >
> > You think you're not actually doing that?> >
Not even close. I am saying the number claimed at 95% is ridiculous and completely made up. You do understand that there is a substantial world of possibilities between 95% and 0% do you not? I personally cited three examples of lip syncing that I personally witnessed. So do tell me how am I either denying or defending the practice of faking a performance?
> > > Smells like a burning straw mane to me.> > >
> > So what is the reality, from your perspective? I'm open eyes and ears. Thank you.> >
The reality is that it has happened since the beginning of recorded music and sometimes it is an act of fraud and sometimes it has simply been a benign thing that some programs prefer when having live acts. It's nothing new and it is not nearly as common as the claim of 95%. "Most" rock/pop artists really do play their music live when they perform in concert. TV appearances are more a function of what the show wants than what the artist wants. IMO that is the reality.
t
You're 110% correct 200% of the time.
"what I find disappointing is the militant attitude from those either defending or denying the practice of faking performance"
You're confusing "defending or denying" with having some concern for informed comments and facts. "I am certain it is high" is neither.
"You're confusing 'defending or denying' with having some concern for informed comments and facts."
So you believe the concern over accuracy of the quantity of pop music being lip-synced or playback is more important than the concern over the fact such practice is ghastly widespread?
"'I am certain it is high' is neither."
So what are the facts? Your bold statement suggests you have some deep and detailed knowledge on this subject. Maybe some of us here will learn something. Thank you.
"Your bold statement suggests you have some deep and detailed knowledge on this subject."
I know what a fact is for starters, and how it is different from an opinion or a wild guess or rampant internet speculation based on an uninformed opinion.
I also have experience both with live performance and using various forms of technology, and as a result I understand what is possible and what is not possible.
I guess all of these reporters are lying, all of this is BS, all "pulled out of their ***', and none of them "know what a sound check is".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lip_sync#In_music
Some artists switch between live singing and lip-synching during the performance of a single song.
Some singers habitually lip-sync during live performance, both concert and televised.
Sometimes lip-synching performances are forced by television for short guest appearances, as it requires less time for rehearsals and hugely simplifies the process of sound mixing. Some artists, however, lip-synch as they are not as confident singing live and lip-synching can eliminate the possibility of hitting any bad notes.
Artists often lip-sync certain portions during strenuous dance numbers in both live and recorded performances, due to lung capacity being needed for physical activity (both at once would require incredibly trained lungs).
Ian Inglis, author of Performance and Popular Music: History, Place and Time (2006) notes the fact that "Jackson lip-synced 'Billie Jean' is, in itself, not extraordinary, but the fact that it did not change the impact of the performance is extraordinary; whether the performance was live or lip-synced made no difference to the audience."
In 1989, a New York Times article claimed that "Bananarama's recent concert at the Palladium", the "first song had a big beat, layered vocal harmonies and a dance move for every line of lyrics", but "the drum kit was untouched until five songs into the set, or that the backup vocals (and, it seemed, some of the lead vocals as well-a hybrid lead performance) were on tape along with the beat". The article also claims that "British band Depeche Mode, ...adds vocals and a few keyboard lines to taped backup onstage" although this practice is common place in the genre of electric music.[3]
Chris Nelson of The New York Times reported that by the 1990s, "[a]rtists like Madonna and Janet Jackson set new standards for showmanship, with concerts that included not only elaborate costumes and precision-timed pyrotechnics but also highly athletic dancing. These effects came at the expense of live singing." Edna Gundersen of USA Today reported: "The most obvious example is Madonna's Blond Ambition World Tour, a visually preoccupied and heavily choreographed spectacle. Madonna lip-syncs the duet Now I'm Following You, while a Dick Tracy character mouths Warren Beatty's recorded vocals. On other songs, background singers plump up her voice, strained by the exertion of non-stop dancing."
Similarly, in reviewing Janet Jackson's Rhythm Nation World Tour, Michael MacCambridge of the Austin American-Statesman commented "[i]t seemed unlikely that anyone—even a prized member of the First Family of Soul Music—could dance like she did for 90 minutes and still provide the sort of powerful vocals that the '90s super concerts are expected to achieve."
During the 2008 Beijing Olympics, CTV news reported that a "nine-year-old Chinese girl's stunning performance at the Beijing Olympics opening ceremony has been marred by revelations she was lip-synching". The article states that "Lin Miaoke was lip-synching Friday to a version of "Ode to the Motherland" sung by seven-year-old Yang Peiyi, who was deemed not pretty enough to perform as China's representative".
During Super Bowl XLIII, "Jennifer Hudson's flawless performance of the national anthem" was "lip-synched ...to a previously recorded track, and apparently so did Faith Hill who performed before her".
On the 2009 finals of The X Factor, Cheryl Cole partly mimed one of her new songs. In 2009, US pop singer Britney Spears was " 'extremely upset' over the savaging she has received after lip-synching at her Australian shows".
Teenage viral video star Keenan Cahill lip-syncs popular songs on his YouTube channel. His popularity has increased as he included guests such as rapper 50 Cent in November 2010 and David Guetta in January 2011, sending him to be one of the most popular channels on YouTube in January 2011.
Then there's no problem.
you know I hate multi-miking, but I hate all the subsequent 'kill music for the masses' shit, even MORE.
I love HIP but we both know that. ;-)!
Note that a post in response is preferred.
Warmest
Timothy Bailey
The Skyptical Mensurer and Audio Scrounger
And gladly would he learn and gladly teach - Chaucer. ;-)!
'Still not saluting.'
"Since then, almost nobody ever takes the chance of singing vocal hamony live."Click link below...... Apparently pop singer Ana Torroja didn't get the memo, in a concert in Mexico City, in front of roughly 300,000 people.......... Her voice was shot to boot.
(If there is anything that amazes me, it's people unable to distinguish a pre-recorded vocal from a live microphone feed.)
"It amazes me how the average non-classical, non-jazz listener fails to realize all of this, even when I've taken them literally by the hand in these so-called concerts, and had the mixing engineer reveal to then how it's all done."
It's not just non-classical/non-jazz listeners...... I hear it from just about all tastes in music.........
"People continue to disbelive, and in some cases react with anger and violence. I've had that kind of reaction even here, on the pop boards. It's almost like religion to people. I don't get it."
I've had such reactions on the general music board...........
If the music is performed by their favorite artists, they'll be militant........ Heck.... I was even warned recently not to bash certain types of music at someone's house.....................
The sad part is I've observed many music critics backing down in recent time....... A big reason why a lot of the dreck today is accepted and promoted as artistic marvels. The standards are lowered for future artists....... If doing it the easy way wins accolades, hard work will forever be replaced by modern technical enhancements. For the critics are afraid to cite what I personally think is obvious.
Edits: 06/06/12
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: