In the wake of the Britney Spears tour, there's been quite a bit of local debate on the issue of lip-synching. I think it's a rip-off. What you do think?

Concert tickets in Australia cost at least $100. I believe the price for Britney's concert ranged from $179 to $1500. Is that a fair price to pay to see someone pretend to sing? I think not. If I am going to pay that sort of money to go to a concert, I expect to see the artist to perform live. After all, that's their job!

If they have the ability to perform, and don't, then they are basically saying "I can’t be bothered to perform for you. You are not worth the effort". Which is quite an insult!

If they are actually unable to perform live, then they shouldn't take people's money under false pretences. Consumers deserve to know what they are paying for. It should be compulsory that the advertising accompanying these events advises consumers that the performance will be lip-synched. If that was the case, I suspect anyone with half a brain would choose to spend $20 on a CD instead.

Over this side of the country the state governments are thinking about making it law that lip-syncing shows would have to be promoted as such.

There's one story here .. news.com.au

it contains one of the best lines ever ...

Quote:

---

"Consumers should be protected, even those who go to a Britney Spears concert," Ms Bond said.

---

LOL - I'll guess she isn't a fan

Agreed, it is a total rip off. I agree that they should advertise lip-synching in advance. However, with Britney and others of her ilk, I suspect it wouldn't make much difference. It seems to be accepted as the norm these days.

I get very het up when watching the X-Factor over here. Week by week a bunch of amateurs do their best to sing live. If they don't put on a spectacular dance show, the judges slate them for being boring. However, it is extremely difficult to do a Britney-style dance routine and sing well, so if they go for the routine the singing suffers. Then they have established artistes such as Britney and Cheryl Cole who come on as guest stars and mime to their latest releases. It's crazy.

Quote:

---

"Consumers should be protected, even those who go to a Britney Spears concert," Ms Bond said.

---

My sentiments exactly! (I'm not a fan either).


Re the X-factor. I don't watch reality shows so haven't seen this one. I've never heard of it so I don't know if we get that show here. But I take your point about dancing versus singing. I suspect most people would rather they cut back on the dance routines and focussed on the singing, and you can always have dancers in the background. When you buy a CD, you only get the singing!

I'm sure that the Bee Gees were lip-synching (and not very well) on the previous weeks Strictly Come Dancing. This is great pity because the main vocalists and orchestra for the dances are all live.

I note that the BBC try to cover themselves by this quote from the Strictly website FAQ's

Q: Is the musical guest live every week?

In order to secure the best guests possible for the show on rare occasions musical guests are pre-recorded because of their availability.

To me that's a cop out. What's availability got to do with it. More likely that the artist wants to sound exactly like their new record they are promoting.

Ian

I equate it with photography. You take the picture, then fix it up a bit -- don't they do the same for singers? They are recorded, then "tweaked" and they come out sounding wonderful. If they were to sing "live" they would probably not sound half as good. For example, a couple years ago I heard Patty LaBelle sing live - without the mega-music back-up, no tweaking, no loudspeakers, etc., and she sounded horrible! If she recorded like that, then no one would ever buy her recordings. Call me cynical, but that's how it comes across to me. Without magnifying speakers, proper back-up, etc. they can't project their voice above all that live music.

Maybe hearing Britney sing live would be the rip off, rather than her lip-synching.
I understand Madonna has been doing it for years. It all comes down to the show production values, the more razzle dazzle the more likely the lip-synching. These people have to breath..
I'd be staggered if down to earth rockers like, umm, Springsteen, would lip-synch, or indeed need to. For these guys its about the music not the production.
But if you go to a show for entertainment you want to be entertained so...

I think that when you go to see someone perform 'live', you don't expect to hear an exact replication of their studio recordings & shouldn't mind a few bum notes. I would say that every band I've been to see (and there have been a few) have performed as well as they can and adapted theirs songs to fit the live environment. Obviously, in the recording studios instruments & vocals can be multi-tracked to add depth to the sound but that's not as easy to do on stage.
The likes of Britney & Mad-donna are 'performing' under false pretenses as far as I'm concerned and their concerts should be advertised as such. Miming because they can't dance & sing at the same time is losing the whole point of making their kind of muzak in the first place. (I'm not a fan either.)

Don't even get me started on 'reality' shows...

As quogequox said, these people have to breathe. If an artist stands in one place, or walks the stage with the mic, of course they will actually sing. Britney, Madonna and many others who really dance, and run around, can't be expected to sing at the same time. I do think they should advertise the fact, however. Just in case.

Jim's 4 rules for Concerts vs. Shows.

1.A concert has live music-a show does not.

2. If the music sounds exactly like the CD, it probably is the CD.

3. If there are no musicians on stage-well, that's a huge give-a-way, isn't it?

4. If the "artist" plods on stage wearing a baseball cap on backwards, and the first thing he/she says is "Yo Yo Yo", it's a show.

People pay $100 and up to see Britney Spears? That's a joke right?

That's for the cheap seats, Anton ...

I hope her shows are quite the spectacle because she sure isn't bringing anything to the table musically.

Bottom line is if it makes people happy it's a good thing.

I went to see P!nk when she was touring here in Australia. Now that was a show, and she sang live, no lipsynching. She danced, swung from a trapeze, and much more, and sang every note live. At one point, while hanging upside-down from the trapeze, her heavy breathing was heard loudly as she caught her breath. The audience laughed at that. The tickets weren't very expensive either.
Great performance!

I forgot to say that she sang beautifully while doing all that as well.

Lip-syncing on "American Bandstand" or "Soul Train" might have been acceptable back in the day when 45 RPMs were being pushed by the labels. But there's no excuse for it during a show that's supposed to be live. Lip-syncing shows should be more than advertised, there should be a special deceit tax and/or lowered ticket prices. Even worse that lip-syncing are the fake bands advertising themselves as an established band (ie the Coasters, the Guess Who, other '50s R&B, Motown, British Invasion groups) when there's no connection or no viable connection (one-time bass player, son of a replacement drummer, etc). These scumbags shouldn't be allowed to perform using such deceit.

I don't agree at all with "Britney, Madonna and many others who really dance, and run around, can't be expected to sing at the same time." It's pretty commonplace for singing and theatrics at the same time during a show. It definitely separates the authentic from the frauds.

Milli Vanilli won a Grammy one year.... and then lost it for being 'exposed' as lip-synchers!

So, no; Don't think it's acceptable.

I've been to some great concerts and heard some amazingly talented people sing LIVE.(AC/DC, U2,etc etc).

Britney and their ilk? Let the record industry moguls pay for the fact that they build these people up to believe they're something that they're not : Talented.
I wouldn't even download for free the music of Ms Spears and Co.

- I get that it's all a matter of taste, but I tend to listen to artists who 'you just know' can really sing (Joss Stone,Rob Thomas,etc etc).

Susan Boyle has put the cat amongst these talentless lip-synching canaries. She really shows them up to be what we all know: glorified back-ups.

I think lip-synching is acceptable; if I just paid to watch a 200lb Marine pretend to be Brittany Spears.