Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
throwback

When Gaga Called out Lip Syncers

Featured Posts

TheShameMonster   Paws Up 6,893
TheShameMonster

c1e22_axedancing.gif

Britney @ this interview

Edited by TheShameMonster
  • LMAO 2
  • Shook 1
karma's not a liar

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fable   Paws Up 13,584
Fable

Controversial, but I disagree with Gaga on this one. Some artists, or performers, have skills different from singing. There are plenty of examples of bad performances that include lip-syncing but also plenty of great (even iconic) performances from the likes of artists like MJ, Madonna, Britney ect when in their prime.

Even just hypothetically:

We've seen a couple of recent examples of performances that feature live vocals from an artist/performer with a live dance routine from another artist/performer.
 

 

Even performances like Lemon often features the studio audio of Rihanna without her there and features Mette Towley dancing.
 

 

 


What if those dancers happened to also be the one who recorded the song? Would their performances be 'bad' if they performed like this without live vocals?

Live vocals are not the only way people can perform, if that's an artist's performance style and they do it well that's fantastic - but if the focus of the performance is on the dancing, the light show, the instrumentalists or the studio version is played without live singing in order to create a certain experience then... What's the problem?

As long as an artist is not trying to maliciously deceive their audience into thinking they are singing live, I don't see the problem.

Edited by Fable
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 3

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
GypsyBabe   Paws Up 11,450
GypsyBabe

I mean, I kind of agree with her. :staymad: 

But to each their own. I just personally have never been a huge fan of an artist who lip syncs. Live vocals mean a lot to me and I like the spontaneity and variety of a live singer. I prefer vocals over dancing any day. But not every fan is like that, and I understand. 

  • Like 2

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Graffiti Heart   Paws Up 4,054
Graffiti Heart

Honestly I don’t care :poot: I’d rather get a quality performance over shitty vocals.

  • Like 2

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Miel   Paws Up 5,738
Miel

I guess it all depends on what you're looking for in a performer and performance.

I'm with Gaga on this one- I expect artists who write and record their own music, to perform it. But to each their own.

  • Like 7
3 points in and ready for more

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
A Hybrid   Paws Up 416
A Hybrid

Like Gaga said, you SHOULD judge lip syncers. It’s called a live concert. How do you like an artist if you can’t trust them? I’m not saying lip syncers deserve no fans, I’m saying lip syncers deserve no audience.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Scheiße is overrated

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
aaronyoji   Paws Up 1,458
aaronyoji
1 hour ago, Fable said:

Controversial, but I disagree with Gaga on this one. Some artists, or performers, have skills different from singing. There are plenty of examples of bad performances that include lip-syncing but also plenty of great (even iconic) performances from the likes of artists like MJ, Madonna, Britney ect when in their prime.

Even just hypothetically:

We've seen a couple of recent examples of performances that feature live vocals from an artist/performer with a live dance routine from another artist/performer.
 

 

Even performances like Lemon often features the studio audio of Rihanna without her there and features Mette Towley dancing.
 

 

 


What if those dancers happened to also be the one who recorded the song? Would their performances be 'bad' if they performed like this without live vocals?

Live vocals are not the only way people can perform, if that's an artist's performance style and they do it well that's fantastic - but if the focus of the performance is on the dancing, the light show, the instrumentalists or the studio version is played without live singing in order to create a certain experience then... What's the problem?

As long as an artist is not trying to maliciously deceive their audience into thinking they are singing live, I don't see the problem.

its very simple, if you label yourself a recording artist, you should just sing your songs. if you dance, not sing, you're a dancer. its as simple as saying youre a songwriter so you don't mime your music like britney spears. if her performances rely so heavily on dancing and not singing, then she should've become a dancer. not a singer. 

  • Like 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
aaronyoji   Paws Up 1,458
aaronyoji
58 minutes ago, Graffiti Heart said:

Honestly I don’t care :poot: I’d rather get a quality performance over shitty vocals.

but if the performer you're watching is a recording artist, the only type of performance you can judge them on is their voice. for whatever reason, pop artists think they need to do both constantly and its so stupid. 

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Bling   Paws Up 2,679
The Bling

...I'm still giving Britney my coinZ :hor:

I won't judge an artist for lipsyncing as much as it's obvious they're doing it and don't try to fool you with prerecordings or some **** :triggered: Even though when they use the album track it feels lazy... 

That pretty much makes me appreciate Gaga A LOT for having the balls of dancing and singing her ass off everytime :golfclap: But doesn't make me look down on any other artist who doesn't, it's just that Gaga is miles ahead :hor:

  • Like 1
Sigmund Freud, analyze this

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Graffiti Heart   Paws Up 4,054
Graffiti Heart
24 minutes ago, aaronyoji said:

but if the performer you're watching is a recording artist, the only type of performance you can judge them on is their voice. for whatever reason, pop artists think they need to do both constantly and its so stupid. 

Oh then that’s diffe:poot:rent 

I wouldn’t go to an Adele concert to see her lipsync. When they’re all about their voice there’s no reason to do it.

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fable   Paws Up 13,584
Fable
35 minutes ago, aaronyoji said:

its very simple, if you label yourself a recording artist, you should just sing your songs. if you dance, not sing, you're a dancer. its as simple as saying youre a songwriter so you don't mime your music like britney spears. if her performances rely so heavily on dancing and not singing, then she should've become a dancer. not a singer. 

If you are a recording artist the title implies you record songs - doesn't say anything about singing live :shrug:When I'm paying to see a performer live, I want them to be a solid performer, I want to see a performance. I don't necessarily want to see them out of breath and missing every note while clumsily moving around stage, if their strength as a performer isn't singing live but they have other strengths then why should they be tied down to a performance style that ultimately doesn't serve them or their audience?

Britney Spears sings - so she is technically a singer - even if she doesn't do it in a live setting. She has never marketed herself as the next Whitney Houston though, she is a performer first and foremost who records her own songs to perform how she chooses.

How do you feel about acts like The Gorillaz? They are musicians, but in terms of performances for award ceremonies they often use holograms of the animated characters they have created.
 

It's a cool performance, it's artistic, it's different (they've been doing this before holograms of dead celebrities became a thing) but it's not live and it isn't supposed to be live - it's a different experience. 

They aren't fooling anybody, everyone knows that the music is pre-recorded - the performance has been planned and drawn and animated. I just think the idea that every musician or performer needs to sing live puts a creative limit on performance and stifles what performance can be and what it can look like. Such narrow parameters of what a performance is, or has to be, limits the sort of entertainment and art people can create which in turn only limits what we can experience as an audience. 

If the artist is honest, or at least not maliciously deceptive, about what they do and they create an entertaining or thought provoking performance without live vocals I don't think it matters. Madonna wouldn't have the career she has if she it was just about her singing - yes she sings, but she was always more concerned with being a great performer. Her recorded music gave her the ability and authority to stand on stage and perform or create incredible music videos and as long as she delivers as a performer (with live vocals or without) then the audience has an entertaining/interesting experience and Madonna has done her job as a performer.

Even if artists that lip-sync aren't to your taste, I think it's close-minded to rule it out as an illegitimate performance style for artists. I could (but wouldn't) say that Gaga should perform like Adele, she says she is a singer so she should just stand and sing in every performance - when she dances around she hinders her own ability to sing, she becomes a little out of breath, she can't reach every note, she sometimes requires a backing track. If you're a singer you should show off your SINGING and sing right? If your distracting from that by dancing around stage then you're not doing a good job as a singer.

We think that's a ridiculous argument now - but it's one that's been used in the past, the truth Gaga is a singer, but she is also more than that. Likewise artists like Michael Jackson, Madonna, Britney Spears, Justin Timberlake... They are recording artists and singers, but they are more than that too - they're performers and if they sacrifice live vocals (occasionally or always) in order to focus on their strengths as performers then so what? People are paying to see them perform.

Also, some music just wasn't created to be played live. Vocals have purposely been distorted or enhanced and are impossible to replicate in a live setting - does that mean the recorded music can't be used in a live setting in a performance? If not, is okay for it to be used for a music video? What's the difference? In both cases you are creating a visual experience or adding to the experience of the music by adding different elements. There used to be controversy over artists lip syncing in music videos, but now it's widely accepted and in fact expected.

Edited by Fable
  • Like 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
ryanripley   Paws Up 46,633
ryanripley

what's sad is people like britney who earn millions by dancing and lip syncing and then there's drag queens out there living on tips who are also dancing and lip syncing probably better than her

but oh well

  • Like 1
https://goo.gl/wFxoYL

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×