The Daily Roxette discussions forum has been closed. The forum is only available as a read-only archive.
Live Performance: What does it really mean?
18 replies
DaminehGessle said on October 25, 2004 20:42:
Well, Sir Elton made comments on Madonna’s live performance. Some of us agreed with him, some of us didn’t. I was personally somewhere in the middle since I wasn’t sure whether he’d said it in the right place at the right time but did believe that Madonna’s live performances were very much out of tune!
Saturday night, I was watching Saturday Night Live when Jessica Simpson messed up! You might know the story. If not, read the news. It made me ask myself: Are these people there to sink or act or hmmm make money off of nothing!!! Why was Milli Vanilli’s mess-up at the Grammy’s such a big deal when most of the artists these days lip-synch anyways. MV lip-synched to someone else’s voice. These artists do it to their own voice but is there much difference? Meh!
Why do we attend concerts? If it’s for seeing our favourite bands sing, then fine... I love seeing my favourite bands live in concert because I can assure myself of their talent as musicians and singers. Well I have two favourite bands: Queen and Roxette. I will never see Queen live because Freddie is dead. But there are many live performances by Queen that take your breath away. They play instruments, sing and entertain the audience. They are musicians who write their own lyrics, music and can sing. As for Roxette: If one day I find out that Mr. Gessle lip-synchs in a concert, well I would save myself some time and money, grab a picture of him, put it by my CD player. I would play his songs while looking at his photo. Same vibe!!! I can even jump up and down or get emotional! Per doesn’t sound very good live. But I like him as a musician because he writes his own music and he sings. He dares to sing! I respect the man!
Would I ever buy a Jessica Simpson album? No. Britney album? No. Fake musicians who don’t write their music, lip-synch at concerts and are all about image? No! Who am I to say what good music is about though. Seems like we are so drowned into materials that we can’t even tell good from bad. There is no bad. It’s how we define it. But sometimes it’s so beyond the line that you can’t put it in the “Oh I don’t like it so I will shut up about it” category. It’s ok... If you want to sell your image, fine. But don’t go around calling yourself a musician. That’s disrespectful to real musicians who put their hearts and souls into their lyrics, music and voice.
DaminehGessle said on October 26, 2004 00:57:
Please read carefully before telling me I am mixing up subjects!!!! “Why was Milli Vanilli’s mess-up at the Grammy’s such a big deal when most of the artists these days lip-synch anyways. MV lip-synched to someone else’s voice. These artists do it to their own voice but is there much difference? Meh! “OK?!?!
nate said on October 26, 2004 03:32:
Hey Damineh,
I think what sets MV apart from today’s lip synchers is the fact that they stole and took credit for somebody else’s music. Many of their fans including myself back in the early 90s were outraged and felt betrayed. The same thing happened about a year with Martha Wash and Blackbox only it did not get as much publicity.
The fact that many artists have to lip synch at their live concerts is not very impressive, and personally I have better ways to spend my money: however, at least they’re not ripping off other artsists and taking credit for their music.
I agree with you about the live concerts though. If I’m going to make that kind of financial investment, I want to hear them perform (and sing) live.
BTW good to hear from you again. Are you still out on the west coast?
DaminehGessle said on October 26, 2004 07:29:
Yup :D. Banging my head against the books haha. Yeah I was away for long. Just been very busy plus nothing interesting around here. Every once in a while I write stuff when I have a topic in mind :D.
Oh there was even a program on tv today about artists these days and lip synching. They mentioned MV, Madonna, and the latest incident on SNL. It was cool to see a program on this topic.
Well those guys who sang the MV songs knew the deal. It was a deal amongst them all, wasn’t it? Nowadays, they can do so much with someone’s voice in the studios with all these equipments. It’s unbelievable. looking back at Live Aid, wow man! I just miss those days.
coyboyusa said on October 26, 2004 12:48:
if I am paying upwards of 50 dollars or more minus concession prices, transportation etcetera to see an artists I have a right to at least expect live vocals, why is it peopel have totally skewed what the concept of a vocal artists these days are, lipsynching to you on guide vocals is not performaing live, we have the europeans to blame for this everyhting they have on tv is to playback mostly
harriej said on October 26, 2004 20:17:
Coyboy: Is Britney American or European?
Answer: American!
One could tell by her behaviour and (missing of ) singing.
rox-kuryliw said on October 26, 2004 21:58:
Wasnt madonna the person to start all this lipsynching thing off with her famous head phones mic thing she wore in the early 90’s ? ! what you know for US lol.
coyboyusa said on October 26, 2004 23:09:
yeah but reportly playing live whilst using playback ahs been a european standard for many years its only recently that yanks have gotten on the bandwago so yes I am blaming europeans, I also blame you guys for inspiring people liek moby to record too lol
Starrox said on October 27, 2004 01:09:
Just a little hint: yes, playback is widely used during TV perfomances on European stations - for the simple fact that playing live’s more expensive than playback and the preparations take much more time (just think of the soundcheck!)! Now compare the average size of European TV stations, ratings and the prices for ads with ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox or even UPN or the WB... do you see the connection? It’s not like they don’t want artists to play live!
DaminehGessle said on October 27, 2004 05:15:
Starrox: It’s not just the preparation. It’s that some artists hmmm “suck” performing live. I don’t think Jessica Simpson can pull off a live song. She was horrible performing live in one of these awards recently. She was HORRIBLE! You can’t sing? Don’t! Why don’t you pursue your acting career and leave the job to those who can?!
m-cvk said on October 27, 2004 07:42:
What does is really mean? Hmmm, I’d say: for some people (most of the time American, like Britney ’fake boobs’ Spears) NOTHING! :-)
Those people wonder “Live?.... what’s THAT????, can you eat it?”
coyboyusa said on October 28, 2004 15:06:
jessica simpson plain sucks she claims she has a gosple upbring she cant hit or sustain high notes and she sings with no emotion sher covers of take my breath away and angles are BAD!
DaminehGessle said on October 28, 2004 21:57:
coyboy: My parents are both educated musicians and vocalists. Both! And we had musicians at our house all the time singing and playing instruments. Should I make albums because I have the classical or rock upbringing? Meh!
RobS said on October 31, 2004 02:33:
I think its pretty sad to call yourself a singer if the only way you can “sing” is if your in a recording studio in perfect conditions with a computer to fix up your voice!!
When i go to a concert i wanna hear them singing, not what i’ve already got at home on CD.
BTW that ashlee simpson thing was sooo funny LOL :-D
Ferdan said on October 25, 2004 21:09:
you´re mixing up subjects...
Milli Vanilli didn´t even sing in their records.... that´s why they sucked so bad the first time they sung live and not playback. Many people wanted their album´s money back.
Here´s the Jessica simpson’ funny moment video
http://www.the-engine.org/files/ashlee_snl.wmv
Anyway, what´s the point of going to a “concert”, paying $30-$60 just to see someone jump like a clown?
I preffer seeing real people sing and play, that´s worth the money.