I ask this question after seeing Britney's supposed comeback video. She flubbed her lip-syncing among other things. No one comments that lip syncing is lame.

In my opinion, real entertainers actually perform their works on stage. Why is lip syncing acceptable?

It became acceptable when the talent pool ran dry..

Well, also, lip-synching has been done since the beginning of television (although early shows were presented live). American Bandstand, Ed Sullivan and many other programs had lip-synched artists performing. But these days, I would agree with grumpy, as well.

Even proper lip-synching takes talent.

I remember as a kid in the late 70's/early 80's when Top Of The Pops was a popular music show in the UK. Everyone and their dog used to mime/lip-sync. It got to the point where the 'performers' wouldn't even make an effort to disguise the fact (especially with the punk groups). Then in '83 New Order played live. They sounded absolutely shit but the fact that they were live made it all the more memorable and enjoyable.

I think lack of work ethic is a factor, too. Some singers don't want to rehearse. They don't keep their voices in shape and they wear themselves down with partying. A great live performance takes effort, and they're not in condition to do it.

It became acceptable when the talent pool ran dry..
So true.....Imagine some of the current "stars" trying to bang out a live performance without the aid of studio voice enhancement.:thumbsdn:
Ashlee Simpson comes to mind.



Bill

As already stated above, been going on for decades in pop music. Anyone who somehow identifies this as supporting evidence of that mystical phenomena of " Hasn't Been Any Talent In Music Since I Was A Teenager" that surfaces often here has paid zero attention to reality since at least the early '60's, maybe earlier than that.

Agreed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpdaga8cCxU

Carl

Agreed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpdaga8cCxU

Carl


So the platters could not sing and needed to lip sync like todays ass hats Britney, Justen and the likes ??

I've been a watchin ye ole Youtube lately and I, "Think" that I see alot of older bands lip synch. ... The oldest ones being back in the 70's ......
I saw what looked like ABBA lip sync. I would feel ripped off if I went to a concert and they were doing the lip sync thing. The last concert that I went to was Reo Speedwagon, it was bad enough that they all had cut their hair, but man they rocked out just like the old daze, and they were definitely live
...... I think that all artists that lip syn should be shot .......

In the fifties it was to avoid errors. Ed Sullivan was the only show I can remeber that was actually live much more than lip synched. Try to find Bobby Darin singing Mack The Knife live...
Dunno about Britney and whoever, I wouldn't know them unless you played them for me and told me it was them. :)


Carl

As already stated above, been going on for decades in pop music. Anyone who somehow identifies this as supporting evidence of that mystical phenomena of " Hasn't Been Any Talent In Music Since I Was A Teenager" that surfaces often here has paid zero attention to reality since at least the early '60's, maybe earlier than that.
In terms of "Pop" music and the last twenty or so years, absolutely. IMO, plenty of no talent hacks being shoved down the collective throats of the masses.
I am not speaking in terms of all new Artist's...of course there is plenty of new talent. Just don't expect to find it on any of the Clear Channel broadcast stations....



Bill

IMO, plenty of no talent hacks being shoved down the collective throats of the masses.

No idea about any masses, but anything going down my throat is by choice, not force.

I am not speaking in terms of all new Artist's...of course there is plenty of new talent. Just don't expect to find it on any of the Clear Channel broadcast stations....

Bill

I don't expect to find anything of any kind through that medium.

But anyway, the topic was lip-synching, and it is not anything new. Or even nearly new. Been done in the film industry since shortly after talkies were invented. It's purely a production decision.

There is a big difference in talent between lip-sync'ers. In the 1960s, pop groups used to lip-sync to their 45s. They'd guitar-sync too--you'd often see electric guitars with no cords attached! I suppose they did this out of either laziness or because they wanted to promote the song as it was on a 45 release.

But in the modern era, you have artists who lip-sync either because that way they can concentrate on their dance moves, or because they are totally dependent on studio sweetening to get their voices on key.

Everyone knows that artists were better in the past than they are now. Those who claim otherwise are simply in denial. Nowadays lyrics and music don't matter, it's what the dance moves are and how slutty you can be.

Lip Syncing goes all the way back to "The Jazz Singer". The difference between a studio recording and a sound set (or "live") session was too great to be acceptable to the public, so sound studio recordings were dubbed in while performers pretended to sing them. Not in all cases, at first, but increasingly it became an almost universal doing.

Its abuse has grown steadily. With more and better studio effects being employed on popular recordings, and with a greater disparity between the record and the performance, producers and "artists" all began to want to achieve a bette3r sound the easy way. Like a drug.

**Edited by Moderators to remove political commentary- not allowed on AK**

There is a big difference in talent between lip-sync'ers. In the 1960s, pop groups used to lip-sync to their 45s. They'd guitar-sync too--you'd often see electric guitars with no cords attached! I suppose they did this out of either laziness or because they wanted to promote the song as it was on a 45 release.

Well, at least you admit you're only guessing, unlike the rest of what follows, which is as much supposition on your part as what you were willing to admit above.

But in the modern era, you have artists who lip-sync either because that way they can concentrate on their dance moves, or because they are totally dependent on studio sweetening to get their voices on key.

Everyone knows that artists were better in the past than they are now. Those who claim otherwise are simply in denial. Nowadays lyrics and music don't matter, it's what the dance moves are and how slutty you can be.

For anyone who didn't recognize that noise, it was a broad-sweeping generalization whooshing through the thread.

I'd take a guess it became pretty popular with the advent of television, and said TV producers unwilling to take any risks, therefore getting the bands to mock the performance.

Follow it up with another big event- the birth of MTV and the music video.

The norm in the music video is to mime your performance- few rare live performances are used for music videos, which are basically 4 minute commercials used to promote an album.

Even most of the greats who have done videos, have "faked" thier performance.

As to talent, humor me here........

I imagine many of the indie bands and what we'd consider "true" talented artists are very reluctant to lip-synch on live tv or on stage, instead going for the intamacy and honesty of a live performance- flaws, feedback, warts and all.

Problem is, mass media is less likely to put them on the television. It's less common to see good bands booked on Saturday Night Live and other former talent showcases. So you won't see 'em anyway, unless you go to the shows. Which are about music first, and not about the extras as priority.

Promoters invest big, big bucks in the "popular" national acts, and have a big risk if the show doesn't go off well. They don't want risks- that's why they sign these pre-fab stars.

so, the emphasis is taken off the real intimacy of singing, the music, and the nuances of the human voice, and then the focus is placed on the "performance" of the entertainer- dancing, choreographed moves, poses, costume/outfit changes, and special effects.

The sizzle is presented, not the steak.

Could you see Townes Van Zandt lip-synching to "Poncho & Lefty" while keeping in step with a choreographed entourage of dancers?

Or could you see Tom Waits singing "Invitation to the Blues" and experincing a "wardrobe malfunction"? Unless, of course, it was done in humor.

My take on things.

And not to say that these additions are bad for a performance- I've enjoyed many over-the-top KISS performances, Bentmen performances, and Alice Cooper performances.

But I also have enjoyed many Jonathan Richman performances, Hope Sandoval performances (when she's not being a dramatic diva), and even a toned-down Bauhaus performance.


The talent is out there- one just needs to look a bit harder and try out a few different venues to find it.

The best stuff always requires a bit more effort from the viewer/listener too, it seems.

Subject to change from any good arguements, points, facts or ideas presented here.

Oops, I forget to clear my post with Tentzone again.

Naw, no clearing with me necessary for anything. But, when opinion is represented as fact, I have this bad habit of calling bullshit. Hope you have a great day.

Paul's referring to contemporary pop music, obviously (even though he may think that anyone who records in more than one track is suspect).

The Music Industry, as a business, has relentlessly promoted the lowering of artistic standards. And they wonder why music sales are down.

Independent artists are as talented as ever (and we have a chance to hear more of them than ever), but in terms of what is either crammed down your throat or stuffed up your backside by The Industry, it's a mighty fallow field out there.

Or could you see Tom Waits singing "Invitation to the Blues" and experincing a "wardrobe malfunction"? Unless, of course, it was done in humor.

Paul, please show SOME restraint. It's lunchtime here in the great middle of America.

I ask this question after seeing Britney's supposed comeback video. She flubbed her lip-syncing among other things. No one comments that lip syncing is lame.

In my opinion, real entertainers actually perform their works on stage. Why is lip syncing acceptable?

Real long time ago - look at the British show "Top of the Pops" back in the 70s, Look at American Bandstand or similar shows - they want bands to come on and play their hits the way they sound on the records. Spares them from wildcards like "Elvis the Pelvis" or other artistic expressions that might get the audience all worked up (grin) ...

I don't find lipsyncing and pretending to sing acceptable at all, but its been going on for decades.

I think the Partridge Family were perhaps the finest LS'ers of all time.....:yes:
("Start Me Up".....Stones runs a close second....):thmbsp:
Remember the Evolution Revolution? They were pretty dam fine as well.....
Although I must admit....the new rash of good LS'ers gives me hope that this isn't becoming another lost Art.....
:lmao:



Bill

Naw, no clearing with me necessary for anything. But, when opinion is represented as fact, I have this bad habit of calling bullshit. Hope you have a great day.

That's what I love about this place. All audio. No attitude.

I don't have a problem with Lip syncing on TV so much, unless its done on a show called Saturday Night "LIVE". Thats pretty lame.

However lip syncing at a "live" concert? That is extremely lame.

Steve

The fact is, Tentzone is sore because I once mentioned that Lucinda Williams's "Essence" and "West" are dreary, slow, and boring records. He'll never get over it.

The fact is, Tentzone is sore because I once mentioned that Lucinda Williams's "Essence" and "West" are dreary, slow, and boring records. He'll never get over it.
Whoa....I have to agree, with Toze. IMO neither fit that description, both are nothing short of amazing. Plus, I have never seen them lip synced.
I will be at the Greensboro Lucinda show on Sunday. Gosh, I hope it's a true live performance....


Bill

You-tube (and, in fact, many digital media) is (are) kind of tough to identify lip-synch, since there's often a little offset between audio and video.

That said, when you hear a studio track that you know well, it's pretty obvious when it's the soundtrack for a video performance.

I recall reading the liner notes for one of the "BBC live" albums (the 'OO's, I think) that in England at one time, due to copyright/royalty regulations, the original, recorded hit couldn't easily just be (re)played on a TV broadcast such as "Top of the Pops". Thus, it became common to pre-record a live performance (or parts thereof) prior to broadcast, and then the artist would mime some or all of that performance (e.g., maybe the vocals were taped, but the instruments live) for the TV broadcast.

...look at the British show "Top of the Pops"...Look at American Bandstand...they want bands to come on and play their hits the way they sound on the records. Spares them from wildcards like "Elvis the Pelvis" or other artistic expressions that might get the audience all worked up (grin) ...


Anyone ever see the "fiasco" (not really even close) with the live performance of the doors on ed Sullivan? The big fear was the mention of "girl we couldn't get much higher"... The band was asked to change the lyrics for the performance.

Of course, Mr. Morrison said it anyhoo. And Ed Sullivan was p.o.'ed.

Here's an excellent (and short) video of an interview with Ray Manzarek (sp?) and a snippet of that performance...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T13Oo3PLGxs

I think the Partridge Family were perhaps the finest LS'ers of all time.....:yes:...

Bill, we're talking musicians here, not tv personalities...:D:D:D

Whoa....I have to agree, with Toze. IMO neither fit that description, both are nothing short of amazing. Plus, I have never seen them lip synced.
I will be at the Greensboro Lucinda show on Sunday. Gosh, I hope it's a true live performance....


Bill

I hear she's performing with a spectacular light show, a dozen Cirque De soliel acrobats, 4 fire breathers, 2 African elephants, a pony, and a troupe of 14 highlty-choreographed dancers.

No less than 7 wardrobe changes are planned.

Oh, and a mash-up duet with rapper Jay-Z.





:D

Bill, we're talking musicians here, not tv personalities
Great....next you'll be saying the "Banana Splits" were just acting, not really playing all of those songs....sheesh.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1gxKLmL8d0&mode=related&search=



Bill

I hear she's performing with a spectacular light show, a dozen Cirque De soliel acrobats, 4 fire breathers, 2 African elephants, a pony, and a troupe of 14 highlty-choreographed dancers.

No less than 7 wardrobe changes are planned.

Oh, and a mash-up duet with rapper Jay-Z.





:D

:lmao:

It is what it is. IMO, if you know it's a lip sync just watch it for what is. I turn it off if the presentation sucks.

Remember The Midnight Special on TV? That was unique.

Just FYI, you'll find a lot of British music videos from the sixties that are not lip-synched because the British Musician's Union enforced a strict TV broadcast ban on lip-synching starting in 1966. Plus the appeal of shows like Ed Sullivan was it was live television- think of Mick Jagger rolling his eyes for being asked to sing "Let's Spend SOME TIME together," and Jim Morrison screaming the forbidden words into the camera in total defiance of Sullivan's protestation. These were not lip-synchers, for sure.

Side note: Thanks to restrictions pushed by the same aformentioned musicians's union, when John Peel got started DJing at the BBC, he discovered a percentage of his program had to be non-recorded, so he began inviting groups he liked to play live in the studio for broadcast. The rest, of course, is history.

apropros to? Hell, I dunno, y'all just got me thinkin'.

no love for lip-synchers here. For a flashy video, fine, but for an actual performance, it better be real.

that is all.