|
|
Post by ambersknight on Jun 10, 2009 6:18:31 GMT -5
I've seen news reports that britney isn't singing live at her concerts. The reason given is that she has to move around a lot with her dancing and as such mimes in order to concentrate on the visiuals. There is also rumours that Jacko will be doing the same at his O2 residency.
personally, if you're just gonna mime and put on visuals, you are as well just putting on a huge screen and showing vids. If you are performing live, it should be live. Live singing, live musicians.
So am I just old fashioned or is there a real point of principle? Would you demand your money back if your singer or band were miming (i know I would)?
|
|
|
|
Post by ambersknight on Jun 10, 2009 10:50:41 GMT -5
My feeling exactly evilwillow. What I find truly perverse is the amount of money these big stars charge for miming. Now I don't care if the ticket is £5 or £500, its still miming and it should never happen, but when the ticket prices for some of these acts border on the extortionate, I find it all the more galling that they don't actually give a live show.
|
|
|
|
Post by ambersknight on Jun 10, 2009 16:11:20 GMT -5
Probably, although those artists who do mime whilst doing live shows are in my opinion treating their fans and audience with contempt.
|
|
|
|
Post by glorylover on Jun 23, 2009 11:19:52 GMT -5
Well I do think that miming isn't right, but sometimes artists don't have a choice, even seasoned performers like Madonna have had to mime on certain occassions, so sometimes there isn't an alternitive option.
|
|
BennyTheKey
Ensouled Vampire
The one and only, Benny[Mo0:4]
Posts: 1,023
|
Post by BennyTheKey on Jun 23, 2009 12:58:04 GMT -5
Singing live on TV shows and stuff like that is different, as there might not be time to set up the audio and shizzle, but when you're doing a concert and not singing live..then..that's just wrong, people are paying to see them sing live, and for them not to, is just bleh!
|
|
Hellbound Hyperion
Bad Ass Wicca
$20 per soul, no refunds[/B]
Dude, you just rescued a puppy![Mo0:18]
Posts: 2,268
|
Post by Hellbound Hyperion on Jul 8, 2009 7:55:52 GMT -5
Hypothetical question: the artist's voice just gives out right before a big show. Mime, or cancel the show?
|
|
|
|
Post by Skytteflickan88 on Jul 8, 2009 8:01:19 GMT -5
The ideal would be that it's live, because the you give something unique and real to the audience, but sometimes they have to dance a lot and get out of breath, then it's okay if they mime. Unless they use the word "live" when promoting the show. Hypothetical question: the artist's voice just gives out right before a big show. Mime, or cancel the show? Mime. Can't cancel for that. Unless you fixed your voice in the computer and your real voice sucks... |
|
|
|
Post by glorylover on Jul 8, 2009 19:00:03 GMT -5
Some artists have dance routines that are sometimes a little too constricting to to enable a live vocal performance to happen
|
|
|
|
Post by Midnight Butterfly on Jul 16, 2009 17:42:38 GMT -5
I thought I already commented in hear  I guess I was wrong I agree with Glory Lover. A good example is the Pussycat Dolls. They get some stick for being pretty bad live at times and then great live at other times. This is because alot of the time Pussycat Dolls choose difficult live dance routines which are pretty distracting. Have you ever tried singing while you were jumping all over the place? Alot of singing techniques are good balance and filling your lungs with oxygen, that is really difficult while dancing. Most major singers have lip synced live because the only other option they had was getting things thrown at them and shouted of the stage. As you will notice, when you see someone live they sound alot better at singing the slower songs. In anycase I think singers should sing live when they can, I wouldnt hold it against them if they decided to lip sync |
|
|
|
Post by wenxina on Jul 16, 2009 18:57:32 GMT -5
For me, it entirely depends on what I'm expecting. If I'm going to see... oh the Foo Fighters, Matchbox 20, Third Eye Blind, Goo Goo Dolls, Sarah McLachlan, etc, then I'm expecting some badass live singing.
But... if I'm paying to go see Britney, then I'm expecting a spectacle... which means lots of dancing, crazy effects, and all that jazz, and thus I'm not too concerned if she's lip-synching since I'm actually paying for the spectacle anyway. Out of breath singing would just kill the entire experience.
|
|
Johanne
Potential Slayer
[Mo0:37]
Posts: 160
|
Post by Johanne on Jul 17, 2009 18:26:56 GMT -5
I think they should definitely sing live. If their dancing routine is so exhausting, change it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Midnight Butterfly on Jul 18, 2009 10:21:02 GMT -5
For me, it entirely depends on what I'm expecting. If I'm going to see... oh the Foo Fighters, Matchbox 20, Third Eye Blind, Goo Goo Dolls, Sarah McLachlan, etc, then I'm expecting some badass live singing. But... if I'm paying to go see Britney, then I'm expecting a spectacle... which means lots of dancing, crazy effects, and all that jazz, and thus I'm not too concerned if she's lip-synching since I'm actually paying for the spectacle anyway. Out of breath singing would just kill the entire experience. I couldnt agree more. I dont see why people pay to go see Briteny spears live and actually expect to see her singing live. The reason you go see Britney is for the amazing show. And I agree with it depending on who you are going to see. It's very rare for rock/metal bands to lip sync. I would be very dissapointed if I went to see Evanescence and they didnt sing live  , but that would never happen. |
|
|
|
Post by henzINNIT on Jul 18, 2009 16:52:55 GMT -5
It depends, definately.
Britney Spears is a pretty awful singer. That's clear even on the processed recorded material. I don't see any bonus in hearing her mangle notes live on stage. Lets face it, if anyone wanted to see a great musician perform live, they wouldn't be seeing Britney Spears. They go to her to see a show.
|
|
Becki
Common Vampire
[Mo0:8]
Posts: 77
|
Post by Becki on Jul 19, 2009 12:14:02 GMT -5
I think if I pay good money to go see someone, they need to perform LIVE. Otherwise I see no point in paying money to see them. I'll just buy a DVD of one of their lip syncing performances and watch it that way.
What I hate is when artists have their voices digitally altered to make them sound better than actually are. You go see them and they sound nothing like they do on their CD's or they sing flat the entire time. That makes me want my money back!
|
|
Becki
Common Vampire
[Mo0:8]
Posts: 77
|
Post by Becki on Jul 20, 2009 18:59:33 GMT -5
I was talking to my 20 year old about this yesterday after I posted here and he said in his opinion that he wasn't paying to see them dance, he was paying to hear them sing. LOL...
As far as what a concert is worth, it definitely depends on who it is for me. When I saw Keith Urban last month my ticket was on the 7th row. He ended up having a small catwalk which ended directly in front of my seat. LOL...I paid 75.00 for my ticket and it was well worth it.
|
|
