Karaoke Forums

we are not a secret society crystal, we are a clique- get it right... the men in black with acid reflux will find me if I say anything further... just know that acid reflux IS watching you... and waiting... MUHAHAHHAHAHAHHA...

Sheesh... they should try using the truth.

Ashley was going to be singing at an awards show Monday so she was saving her voice. The new generation of singers just aren't able to hold up to a rigorous schedule because they're not smoking and boozing it up before the shows! Think about all the really great singers:

Jim Morrison - Drank and smoked almost anything
Frank Sinatra - Smoked, drank good liqour
Sammy Davis Jr. - Smoked
Hank Williams Sr & Jr - Drank like a fish
Billie Holiday - Made Hank look sober
Ozzy Osbourne - Watched the Osbourne's? nuff said!

We could go on, and on....

Macy Gray isn't a new singer. That's Tina Turner after smoking a carton of unfiltered Camel cigarettes!

See? Get 'em smokin and drinkin already! Think about Meatloaf! He just sounded a little 'off' and then he collapses on stage! Now THAT's talent! If you're so worn out that you collapse in the middle of a show but can still belt out tunes nearly perfectly then you're ready for that record deal!

And the Acid Reflux conspiracy? It's true. All the new commercials on the 'disease' are actually for causatory agents. They get you worried that the chilli dog is really acid reflux desease and then yhey put you on the new 'drugs' when you DON'T have it so you suddenly like boy bands and pop tarts.

BTW, the last good 'Boy Band' I heard was BoyzIIMen... teenagers that can sing, harmonize, and do a-capella? Whoops, they have talent... probably shouldn't have given them a record deal!

All,

what is just as bad as all the "lip syncers" are all the "pitch correctors". Records like food should declare its contents:

- On this record no musical instruments were used only midi loops
- The lyrics were stolen
- The singer can't sing so we used protools to correct pitch
- The artists are really 20 lbs heavier so we airbrushed them on the cover

etc.

I heard that some artists as a protest put on their record that: "no pitch correction was used".

Cheers,

Morten

what is cool now is that all future karaoke releases from Ashley Simpson, Britney and other lip syncing pop tarts and fakers will already contain the lead vocal so we all can be just like the "superstars" of pop... no longer will we have to use our own voices during karaoke as we sing our favorite songs... this will enable us to develop better dance routines, stage shows and overall dazzle to make your karaoke experience closer to those who are in "the biz".... -tig

_________________

I disagree on this. Studio time cost money and putting a track together often requires a multitude of takes (sometimes over days). If they have a perfect track but that one note or two requires minor pitch correction then go for it. It's a tool to be used carefully for the occasional 'whoops', not a crutch to be relied upon for every performance or a career.

It always comes down to if you're really a bad singer they can make you sound better but they can't make you sound good. They can however cover up the bad singing with fancy dance routines, lip-syncing, skimpy outfits (or this uncovering?), and hype.

What used to happen?
You listen to an album and think 'great'! I've got to see these guys live! You catch the next concert - they suck and don't sound the same so you stop listening to them, they disappear.

What happens now?
You listen to the album and think - they suck. The studios push the mostly naked youth trying to sing drivel down your throat. Your idiot friends buy tickets, drag you to the concert, and you're forced to endure hours of bad lip-syncing as they do poorly choreographed routines. The labels push them some more to the masses, go triple platinum, and they just won't go away!

Basically, I feel that pitch correctors, compressors, EQ's, clipping multiple takes to create a 'perfect' set, etc are all tools that are at the disposal of the sound engineers to create the 'best' track/sound for an album. Using them to fix a minor issue to get a track out is one thing, using it to 'fix'a bad singer and cover up is another thing entirely - and yes, I understand that's what they're doing.

Whatever happened to the 'good' music and musicians that had that something special? You know - TALENT.

The Music Ind. seems to care less about vocal talent, as when I went to the local Colgate Country Showdown thier scoring system is 0-10 points for each of 5 categories. 1st is Marketability in country music, 2nd vocal or instrumental ability , 3rd originality, 4rth stage presence/charisma, 5th talent and if you wrote your own song you could be awarded a bonus of 0-3 points. Now if there is a tie, they go by three categories down the line and vocals is not one of them.
So what I gathered from that contest is your vacals only count for 1/5th of your score and is the least they worry about.(although you do need to score high in the vocal part or your overall score will be to low to place or win.)

many of the "known" artists don't write their own stuff... this has been a standard for as long as popular music has been on the airwaves. Elvis didn't write a lot of his stuff, either!

That's why when I first discovered pop music in the late seventies and early eighties, I really liked Debbie Gibson. She wrote, performed the music, and the vocals for her stuff... a lot of people compared her to Tiffany, but Tiffany was a manufactured act, like Backstreet Boys, NSync, and others.... she could sing, and was pretty, but that was it. I loved Gibson cause she really WAS talented.

But in today's world, it doesn't matter to the majority just like it didn't then, either. And many of the stars of today have teleprompters and other kinds of aides to help them. Cher publically disclosed that she doesn't remember the pop stuff she makes six months after the studio sessions are over... rapid in and out, that's all the music companies care for. They no longer want groups that have been trying to be discovered for the past ten years... they want FRESH, NOW, HERE type of stuff.

Watch the behind the scenes stuff with your favorite acts, and you might be surprised how much they have to perfect their art to make it "worthy" of being watched. I really was surprised with Queensryche in their MTV Unplugged session. I have a video tape that was recorded from the master tape... and to see them practicing, flubbin' up stuff, redoing tracks,... all to make it look just "right".

And you have to remember that Ms Simpson is certainly not the first person to have something mess up on live TV. I've seen plenty of stuff like that where an artist was on TV and lipsyncin' and it screwed up! !

Matt still has a Debbie Gibson poster above his bed so he is a bit biased... -tig

No, but I DO watch her video from time to time

Homina homina homina!

Actually, , I saw her performance (some of it) during her Broadway production of "Gypsy" as Gypsy Rose Lee! She's come a long way baybe!

I don't think Elvis ever wrote a song.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

Karaokemeister,

how did The Beattles, The Who, Elvis etc. record without protools? At the end of the day you can cut and paste together the necessary pieces if the artist is not capable of singing the whole song in one take. At least in that way the artist has sung _all_ the notes!!!! Perhaps there are notes in the songs of particular artists that they cannot sing at all? Perhaps Britneys range is only one octave and the notes are transposed to the desired octave to create the effect?

It's a slippery slope. First a few notes are corrected because studiotime is expensive and who has time for more than 10 takes when there are parties to attend. In the end you have artist who on their own have a hard time holding a tune in a bucket. I watched Pink live on MTV and she was consistently pitchy. I wonder if Britney, Jessica etc. can even sing on their own?

I also don't agree with comparing pitch correction to compression, reverb or eq. Those things are effects, their presence or absence does not change whether the artist fundamentally can sing. Pitch correction is not an effect. It is cheating. The most fundamental requirement of anyone singing is the ability to hit the correct pitch.

Cheers,

Morten

All of the above is true. Witness the "Concert" vs the "Studio" videos.

Concert videos are fast cut to use the parts that are the closest to the studio version. Studio videos are seamless, due to the post production work.

Plain as the nose on your face.

I wouldn't doubt it and agree wholeheartedly.


I agree that it is indeed a slippery slope. But using pitch correction on a note or two is a far cry from using it to prop up a career for someone who can't sing. Younger people sometimes have difficulty because their voices aren't capable of standing up to the rigors of recording and concerts. It's because of this you rarely see an opera singer under 35. It takes them that long to develop thier voice to be able to stand up to the rigors of singing the music. The signing of younger and younger artists will cause this phenomenum of using technology to 'fix' a lack of talent to continue. Keep in mind I'm not talking about kids who aren't perfect on the recordings but pretty good with a high 'cuteness' factor (think Micheal back in the Jackson 5 days) - I'm talking about taking a kid with marginal talent but looks good and making them 'sound' perfect.

I didn't see the performance but it's possible to have problems with pitch for other reasons - problems with the monitors, etc. I'm not defending her, just pointing out that it can be more than just lack of talent that causes some problems. Remember, acid reflux can really mess you up.


Comparing pitch correction and effects perhaps was a bad choice. However, pitch correction is no more cheating that modifying a performance by changing the length of a note, using a drum machine to replace the drummer, or other technological advances that replace or enhance the 'human' side of the creation of music. Some people have difficulty singing in a studio. I remember someone on this forum saying that they sounded great in practice but when they recorded they sounded like crap. They used completely different mics and set ups with the better equipment being used to record (pop filter, better mic, etc). It wasn't the equipment or talent that was the problem - it was the mental block to being recorded and/or being uncomfortable w/ the different setup. Using a tool to overcome a shortcoming that's not based on talent is acceptable as long as the performance can be recreated live (ie in concert). I've seen people that are great in a studio be terrible in concert and I'm sure there are bands that are great live but terrible in the studio. I'm simply contending that there are more reasons to use pitch correction and other technological tools than lack of talent. Again, they are a tool, not a crutch.

It's unethical to use a tool like pitch correction to create 'talent' from a hack which I agree is what we're seeing more and more. We may just have to agree to disagree on this though.

Just came across this in the local paper Intertenment page.

"Im totally against it and offended by it. Im going out to let my real talent show, not to just stand there and dance around. Personally,I'd never lip-synch. It's just not me." A quote from Lucky magazine interview with Ashlee Simpson before the SNL incedence.

_________________
I can neither confirm nor deny ever having or knowing anything about nothing.... mrscott

karaoke-meister, you make good points and I am pretty much in agreement with you. I still think they could retake until they were able to at least once sing each note on pitch.

On a different note. All these music awards. To be elligible for one at least they should be required to sing unplugged. Isn't it even more outrageous when Grammy's etc are given to lipsynchers and pitchcorrectors???

Morten

Yes, it's outrageous. But I think it's as much the producers and engineers fault as the artist.

A solution? If you use technology to crutch up an artist you should be penalized. Something akin to a fine for every x# of seconds you use a pitch corrector and similar 'modifications - or something similar. Use a pitch corrector for the entire album and triple the cost to produce it (or more)... bet that would stop a lot of them from using them....

If everything was perfect, we would miss all of those funny out-takes at the end of the movie.

(My .02)

Which sometimes are much funnier than the movie. I remember the Jim Carrey (I know...but I love his kind of humor ) movie, Bruce Almighty, where they played all the outtakes at the end. Everyone stopped leaving to watch and the whole place was in an uproar from laughing so hard.

Read his lips: 'Live' means live

By Edna Gundersen, USA TODAY

Elton John has pardoned Madonna, but he's still mouthing off about lip-syncing.
"I have a bee in my bonnet," he says. "A live show should be live. If it's not, the ticket should say: 'Elements of this show are not live, especially the vocals.' Madonna's probably the least culpable of a lot of people, but what I said is an open secret."

At the recent Q magazine awards in London, John blew a fuse over Madonna's nomination for best live act (she lost to Muse). He has cooled since then. (Related story: Elton John, still standing)

"I haven't formally made an apology yet," he says, realizing he might have overstated her crime considering Ashlee Simpson's lip-sync debacle on Saturday Night Live. "I regret that Madonna took the hit. I regret hurting her feelings because I like her, and I admire her as an artist. She's been to my house for dinner, and I enjoy her company. I know she's taken voice lessons, and she's been trying to improve, but her show's not entirely live. It's so complex, with a lot of dancing, and she does lip-sync sometimes."

Liz Rosenberg, Madonna's publicist, said in a statement, "Madonna does not lip-sync. She sang every note of her Re-Invention Tour live."

John says: "My point is that Shirley MacLaine and Liza Minnelli never lip-synced, and they danced. And why do you have to dance? Get over it. Today there's too much mediocrity coming out of MTV, which is making stars of teenagers whose voices are auto-tuned in the studio. It's creating artists who just can't hack it. I'm sick of it."

Leaning on choreography and corrective technology, pop stars are stealing the limelight from more deserving singers who rely on musical chops, John says.

"Record companies pour money into video acts who'll never build a catalog," he says. "Who in hip-hop besides Tupac, Notorious B.I.G. and Eminem will be catalog artists? That's it. Why not put money into tours? That experience playing live will pay off in the next album.

"Radio is playing formularized pap by people who shouldn't be making records. What outlet does Rufus Wainwright have? None. Once in a while something great like the White Stripes gets through, but did anyone play the new Loretta Lynn album?"

A voracious consumer of new music, John is listening to The Killers, Muse, Kings of Leon, The Libertines, Raphael Saadiq, Joss Stone, Kanye West and Anthony Hamilton. He waxes rhapsodic about Destroy Rock & Roll, the electro-orchestral debut by Scottish producer Mylo. And he's inspired by the electrifying returns of Prince and U2.

"U2's Vertigo is so stirring and different, and Prince's tour was fantastic," John says. "And I'm standing my ground."

_________________
LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!