Lip Syncing

[Guest Deadbolt]

Lately it seems like more artists are trying this. Obviously Ashlee Simpson is not too good with this either. Anyway, do you think it's ok for artists to lip sync?

 

I think the main thing about seeing artist live is the fact that you get to hear them really sing their stuff. Anymore when artists make records, you don't know if thats really even them singing on the radio or not. With computers and all these days, anyone can make a decent recording. I think artist that really perform their stuff at the live shows is a plus, you get to see if they actually have the talant.

 

I can understand lip sync from artists that do dance routines. I don't expect anyone to be able to run around dancing and then sing at the same time. So that kinda leaves me thinking, its ok for some artists to do this, but for other artists its not.

[Guest Coffey]

No. If you can't sing, don't try to be a singer. It's that simple. I don't want to hear shit about people being "entertainers" and dancing either. Look at Hammer. He still would sing after all that dancing. It's about the music, not the fucking image. MTV and pop has killed music.

[Nighthawk 0]

Get used to it, because everybody does it.

[Nighthawk 0]

Also, did you just say Mtv and pop killed music? Jesus, you're stupid. Mtv saved music, back in the 80s. Pop, one, is music, and two, has existed, largely unchanged for as long as rock or rhythm and blues has. It also regularly plays a role in saving music.

[Slayer 0]

How?

 

And even if it "saved" music in the early 80's, in the early-mid 90's it eventually denegrated to the point where the M in the title became irrelavant

[Nighthawk 0]

Exactly. The most common complaint about Mtv these days is that is has nothing to do with music, so it can't really kill something it isn't involved in, can it? Does Mtv 2 kill music? Clearly not.

 

Saved is an exageration in both cases, but pop's role is thus: music is cyclical in that every so often we'll get a "revolution" and that will be imitated to death until everyone is sick of it. Then pop comes back to prominence, until the next thing comes along. So pop is a placeholder between new ideas, which I'm sure you'll agree is better than yet another sub par imitation of what was hot a few years ago. If that was all we had, people would just grow tired, spend less money on music, and the industry would suffer. Thus, pop saves music.

[bobobrazil1984 0]

It think it sucks ass and shouldnt be allowed. Unfortunatly too many artists do it now, for it to be done with.

 

I think it would be pretty interesting though, if every venue insisted on no lip syncing, to see who would and who wouldn't do concerts.

[Giuseppe Zangara 0]

Anyone who gets in a moral outrage over lip syncing is naive. The music industry is a shallow creature, concerned with superficiality and moving units; to complain that they don't push "real talent" is moot, because talent doesn't sell.

[Giuseppe Zangara 0]

I think it would be pretty interesting though, if every venue insisted on no lip syncing, to see who would and who wouldn't do concerts.

What would be the point of this? No large scale venue—the sort that would book a major artist that might also lip synch (like Ashlee Simpson)—would stand to benefit from instituting such a policy.

[Giuseppe Zangara 0]

Maybe someone should start a thread denouncing those bands that license their songs for use in commercials. omg what coporate whores

[Jingus 0]

I couldn't care less about bands who are whores for money. My problem is with the dishonesty that lip synching represents. The performers involved are claiming to be giving a real "live" performance, that's what the fans are paying to see, but then not providing it.

[Black Lushus 0]

yeah but are their fans complaining?

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

In some cases, sure, but it can only damage an entity that's already weak in the first place, or that doesn't play their cards right, like Milli Vanilli.

[Slayer 0]

The controversy with Milli Vanilli wasn't their lip-syncing in and of itself (C&C Music Factory and New Kids also lip synced at the time) but rather because they were a front for someone else's music... the musical equivalent of ghostwriting, if you will (the blame for which would fall moreso on the producer, I'd think)

 

Here is the website for the not-dead member of MV, just for the hell of it

[Black Lushus 0]

see that's just it...it really is Britney and Nsync and Ashlee, etc. singing on the tracks, but at live shows they just lip synch and i don't think their fans really care...

 

 

is it just me or do we hash over this arguement every damn month?

[Perfxion 0]

there are two types of lip syncing:

 

1: the whole show because they want to put on a show. These are the Britney Spears, Ashlee Simpson type.

 

2: The never sing a hook type. These are the Usher's and Janet Jackson type. These sing everything except hook. They put on a show and keep singing. These people you can tell because Usher at the 04 VMAs did Yeah then Burn and he was blown big time by Burn because of all the dancing in Yeah!

 

There are few who can do both and keep a show going. Michael Jackson and Beyonce can sing the whole song and keep up the dancing because of how much time they spend singing and moving to put on the best show possible.

[C Dubya 04 0]

If people don't mind, or prefer, seeing "live" acts that are dancing and lip syncing, I don't see the harm in it.

 

Bands that I listen to wouldn't perform that way, and I personally wouldn't want to see it, but I think that if you ask the majority of people who listen to recent pop acts, they'd rather be entertained than to hear poor singing live.

[EricMM 0]

I remember last time we argued about this. I'm against it, I believe people who chose to Lip Synch "suck" but that's just me.

 

If I recall correctly, it's an opinion issue, thru and thru. I think it's a decision you have to make on your own. Maybe if we did a poll or something?

 

Oh and if pop is the saving grace of music between the new "it" sensations, BAD pop is what kills music. Good pop (Jackson, Wonder, etc) keeps people interested in good music. Bad pop (Spears, Chingy, etc) keeps people uninterested in good music.

[Nighthawk 0]

Now now, I've defended Britney Spears many times before, but someone in her position requires several things; good marketing (check), good production (mostly check), a dynamic and captivating persona (check), preferably dancing and choreography ability (check) and passable singing talent (check). She's more like the ideal for that kind of teen pop than anything else.

Don't judge it unless you're sitting there going "Man, I love Christina and Mandy Moore and Jessica Simpson but these Britney albums just aren't cutting it! In my day we had real songwriters like Tiffany!"

[nl5xsk1 0]

see that's just it...it really is Britney and Nsync and Ashlee, etc. singing on the tracks, but at live shows they just lip synch and i don't think their fans really care...

 

 

is it just me or do we hash over this arguement every damn month?

Lushus is right ... if you tell a Britney Spears fan that she's lip synching while onstage, you'd probably get a "who cares, Britney rulez!!!!" type of response. As in, the fans couldn't give a shit. It's only people that hate Britney or that style of music that actually care. Personally, I'd be uber-pissed if I went to a show where the artist was lip synching ... but I'm not into that style of music, so I'd probably be uber-pissed to be at a Britney Spears show regardless of her singing or not.

[starvenger 0]

is it just me or do we hash over this arguement every damn month?

Yes, we do.

 

To me, lip syncing itself is not an evil thing - in fact, it's pretty much an accepted thing anywhere but in North America. What bothers me is that singers will state "oh we'd never lip sync" and then blame things like acid reflux when they are found out to be lip syncing. In this sense Britney doesn't bother me because she's never said that she didn't lip sync (the fact that she's a giant slut who is a "role model" to little girls does).

 

Anyways, that's how I see it.

[Nighthawk 0]

Don't get me started on the giant slut thing either. Ripper would argue that for me, why isn't he ever in this folder?

[Giuseppe Zangara 0]

If Britney Spears is a slut, then starvenger is a prude.

[starvenger 0]

Don't get me started on the giant slut thing either. Ripper would argue that for me, why isn't he ever in this folder?

OK, I won't. Let's just say I don't agree with what she is and what she has tried to portray, and if she were like Christina Aguilera and very open about being a slut, it'd be fine by me.

 

If Britney Spears is a slut, then starvenger is a prude.

I know I'm not a prude, and I've never really tried to present myself as one. Don't know where exactly you got that from...

[Giuseppe Zangara 0]

Spears uses her sexuality as a selling point, which is something that famous people—be it actors or those in the music industry—have done for decades. Yes, there was a period of time when Spears was trying to pass herself off as something that might resemble a role model for the young people, but that time was years ago. I don't see why anyone other than an uptight grandma would get in a tantrum over some exposed flesh and risque dancing.

[Slayer 0]

Good thing Spears is turning into a trailer park wife at this point

[Nighthawk 0]

Reverting to, more like. It was always her destiny.

[starvenger 0]

Spears uses her sexuality as a selling point, which is something that famous people—be it actors or those in the music industry—have done for decades. Yes, there was a period of time when Spears was trying to pass herself off as something that might resemble a role model for the young people, but that time was years ago. I don't see why anyone other than an uptight grandma would get in an outrage over some exposed flesh and risque dancing.

You act as if this "period of time" wasn't 1-2 years ago, coinciding with her recent albums and Crossroads.

 

Anyways, it's not so much the flesh and dancing I really care about, it's more that she should be open about what she wants to do, as opposed to trying to please her handlers and the kiddies as well. Just be whatever it is she wants to be, and be done with it.

[Giuseppe Zangara 0]

Crossroads came out three years ago. Also, what about her recent albums? Are you under the impression that songs and videos for "I'm a Slave for You" (forgive me for skipping the Prince-esque spelling) and "Toxic" are for children? And don't tell me her music is being marketed towards young people, because all pop music is marketed towards young people.

[starvenger 0]

Crossroads came out three years ago. Also, what about her recent albums? Are you under the impression that songs and videos for "I'm a Slave for You" (forgive me for skipping the Prince-esque spelling) and "Toxic" are for children?

No, but IIRC, "I'm A Slave For You" was on the same album as "Not A Girl, Not Yet A Woman". Mixed messages there.

 

I do stand corrected on the album "Toxic" was on - this was more of a dance-pop album and the lyrics are more of the "adult" variety.

 

And don't tell me her music is being marketed towards young people, because all pop music is marketed towards young people.

No, I'm not going to tell you that.