next Tour - eliminate backing tracks

[Sid 6,755]

No. I hate the sound of backup singers, it sounds so tacky to me. I'd rather her use the studio backing vocals, and if she's gonna dance her ass off I'd rather her sing live over a track than have her sounding out of breath the entire time 

[jojuun 4,159]

Just now, blackstar said:

you can hear backing singers very well here

 

There's still backing track in there... It ALSO features live backing vocals. 

The backing track is more obvious here for instance: 
 

 

 

[jojuun 4,159]

6 minutes ago, AJH219 said:

I agree. Its a cheap and LAZY cop out, I'm not paying over $100 to hear the album played over the speakers. Sing live, without backing tracks, or gtfo tbh. I'll take vocals over choreography any day. Especially if she can't bother to hire someone decent to create choreography that doesn't look what you'd see at a middle school dance  

Find me any performer who dances that DOESN'T use backing track. I dare you. You won't find it. Or maybe you do but I'll bet it sounds horrific. It doesn't exist for a reason, it is physically impossible to do that in these arenas and stadiums she's performing in. But Gaga COULD be smarter about it and hire a better live engineer, like Beyoncé who has an entire 8-people crew for just her vocals only. Most people think Beyoncé is 100% live when she's dancing on stage but she ALWAYS has a backing track, except for the ballads and acoustics (aka songs without choreo). The difference is that Beyoncé's vocals are flawlessy (no pun intended) mixed during her live shows. 

Here's an interview with Madonna's live sound engineer below, maybe this will enlighten and educate you a bit more. These artists are on mega-world tours, singing live with just a little bit of support from the control room and/or backing singers, and you dare to call them lazy. Gaga broke her damn body for you, how dare you?
 

 

[lg5 1,394]

I've been wanting this ever since she started using backings again after the monster ball.  I remember she used Backup Singers for that one ARTPOP performance on TV. Can't remember what show it was? Anyway, it was really pretty. 

[giskardsb 12,565]

3 minutes ago, lg5 said:

I've been wanting this ever since she started using backings again after the monster ball.  I remember she used Backup Singers for that one ARTPOP performance on TV. Can't remember what show it was? Anyway, it was really pretty. 

yes this should be the model for the next tour.

 

 

[jojuun 4,159]

Some of you are so clueless about this topic but have such harsh opnions, it boggles my mind. There hasn't been a single Gaga performance with choreo, wether on tour or not, that didn't feature a backing track. Period. But she's still singing 100% live, loudly, over that, so who cares? She's LIVE all the time.

[AJH219 4,448]

5 minutes ago, jojuun said:

Find me any performer who dances that DOESN'T use backing track. I dare you. You won't find it. Or maybe you do but I'll bet it sounds horrific. It doesn't exist for a reason, it is physically impossible to do that in these arenas and stadiums she's performing in. But Gaga COULD be smarter about it and hire a better live engineer, like Beyoncé who has an entire 8-people crew for just her vocals only. Most people think Beyoncé is 100% live when she's dancing on stage but she ALWAYS has a backing track, except for the ballads and acoustics (aka songs without choreo). The difference is that Beyoncé's vocals are flawlessy (no pun intended) mixed during her live shows. 

Here's an interview with Madonna's live sound engineer below, maybe this will enlighten and educate you a bit more. These artists are on mega-world tours, singing live with just a little bit of support from the control room and/or backing singers, and you dare to call them lazy. Gaga broke her damn body for you, how dare you?
 

 

Same old "she broke her hip" bullshit. No one forced her to push her body to the extreme  I still stand by my statement, its lazy as fck to rely on backing tracks. If you can't sing live and do choreography, don't bother going on tour. They're singers for a reason. But you people will defend anything. Pathetic  

[giskardsb 12,565]

4 minutes ago, jojuun said:

Some of you are so clueless about this topic but have such harsh opnions, it boggles my mind. There hasn't been a single Gaga performance with choreo, wether on tour or not, that didn't feature a backing track. Period. But she's still singing 100% live, loudly, over that, so who cares? She's LIVE all the time.

so let the backup singers sing what the backing track is doing, and throw away the backing tracks.  Simple, and so much more organic and real.  

[lego 44,165]

Yes please! She just needs to find perfect matching backing singers like this

                                                         

 

[jojuun 4,159]

3 minutes ago, giskardsb said:

yes this should be the model for the next tour.

 

Okay, let me break down the audio in this performance for you:

- Like I said earlier in this thread: her acoustics are always live. She's 100% live, with no support, during 3/4 of this performance. There's a little reverb throughout the entire section. That's normal, everyone uses that.

- When she gets up from the chair, you can clearly hear the shift they pulled in the control room, there is a sudden compression changer and heavier reverb on her vocals, aka the "echo" that's on her voice.

- If you listen closely, the final part of the performance is a mess when it comes to it's audio. Her back-up singers are not in-sync with her vocals and together with the live mix and the instrumental backing track (cause that's a thing too, but y'all don't understand that.)

- When she does the spoken bit at the end ("free my mind...")that would be impossible to do in a live arena setting because the audience is always singing/screaming/clapping and all of that sound travels back into the microphone. It would sound a MESS if it wasn't compressed right and wasn't mixed in with a backing track.

I can't believe Lady f*cking Gaga is under attack for her vocals... She's always live. Who the f*ck cares about the little bit of vocal backing track she uses? Her music is electronic pop anyway, there's ALWAYS an instrumental backing track because her live band IS NOT capable of doing all of the studio compression and digital beats on the spot, which is why there's computers on stage and why there's a tech-booth in the middle of the arena's of ANY show. The audio has to be edited and compressed LIVE on the spot. The musicians are mixed in with the digital soundboard and she's mixed in with the vocal soundboard and that all travels at the speed of light into the speakers and into her in-ears and those of her band members.

It's not as easy as it looks, why do you think tours take so much time to prep? The technical aspect behind it is INSANITY.

I hate this fanbase sometimes.

[Whispering 18,865]

Depends on the type of show she is going for. I would be okay with it, though. I've been to many concerts where background singers are heavily used. You just have to get really good people and the right music director who knows how to bring it all together. With the right people in place, Gaga is certainly the type of artist that can deliver an excellent show with back up singers. 

[jojuun 4,159]

18 minutes ago, AJH219 said:

Same old "she broke her hip" bullshit. No one forced her to push her body to the extreme  I still stand by my statement, its lazy as fck to rely on backing tracks. If you can't sing live and do choreography, don't bother going on tour. They're singers for a reason. But you people will defend anything. Pathetic  

You don't get what I'm saying. No one is "relying" on backing tracks. If you'd actually LISTEN to what the sound engineer is saying in the clip I posted for you, you'd know that. Gaga is 100% live, loud and clear, ABOVE the backing track. Vocals ALWAYS need to be compressed during live performances, even Adele has a live sound engineer, because audiences are loud as hell and microphones are sensitive and pick up on any sound in the room. Gaga ALWAYS will need a backing track anyway because her music is electronically driven and her drummer, keyboard players and guitarist can't recreate the DJWS or RedOne beats for instance. That's called the multi-mix.

The multi-mix is the sound YOU hear during the performances. Any tour or performance starts off with all of the elements digitally recorded, the general base of the multi-mix. When you have a live guitarist for instance, you can take out the guitar portion of the multi-mix because that instrument it is being played live. But that guitarist still needs the original mix in his in-ears because he can't listen to himself if he'd hear what you are hearing as an audience member. He needs the cue to come in, so he doesn't miss a beat. It's impossible otherwise during a LIVE show on that level.

Her main vocal is the one she's singing live, on the spot. It's ALWAYS edited. Even ****-ups or off-key notes are actually "edited" because they're compressed and 99% of the time all singers use reverb on their voices, so it just sounds fuller, crisper and bouncier. 

The Monster Ball featured the perfect example of "modern day live vocal mixing". Gaga's live vocal is the lead throughout the entire show, her backing vocalists are the second loudest thing you hear and then there's her backing track. There's not a chance in HELL she's able to sing Beautiful Dirty Rich completely live for instance, because the song features echo'ing and repeating of the lyrics in the background vocals. She will always need either A) heavy backing vocalists that sing that portion for her or B) her backing track. Or option C) (which is most common these days) a combination of her main vocal, backing vocals AND the backing track, so everything can come together and sound crisp for the audience, who's there to be entertained, not hear Gaga's studio vocals brought to life. Why would you want that anyway? When Gaga's in the studio, she's standing still behind a microphone, her vocals are then compressed and mixed. There's not a chance in hell she's going to do Just Dance or Bad Romance standing still, who'd be entertained by that?

You are simply being unreasonable and are clearly not educated on the topic of soundmixing and liveshows.

NO ONE has ever done a two hour popshow with choreo, without using a backing track. Go ahead and prove me wrong. NO ONE does it because even the BEST live vocalists in the world can't get up and dance and sound exactly like their records. It's impossible, especially in huge (and loud) arenas.

And I only referred to her hip because you said Gaga was lazy. A lazy person doesn't go on a 100-date world tour in the first place. It's not like Gaga's lip syncing the entire show. Get a grip.

[jojuun 4,159]

30 minutes ago, YourSweet666 said:

Yes please! She just needs to find perfect matching backing singers like this

 

Those are not backup vocalists, that a freaking choir. And Michael is SITTING DOWN. Gaga does that all the time during her acoustic songs. It's not possible to get these types of vocals for a dance song, unless it's slowed down (like Poker Face acoustic).

Why is everyone on here so clueless about the technical part of performing? 

[jojuun 4,159]

54 minutes ago, giskardsb said:

so let the backup singers sing what the backing track is doing, and throw away the backing tracks.  Simple, and so much more organic and real.  

Have you ever seen Madonna's 1993 Girlie Show Tour? That's a show where what you are saying is being done. The entire tour (except for it's lips synced opening number) is organic instruments and back-up singers doing what a backing track would usually do. But NONE of the songs in that show are close to their original form. Everything sound different because nothing in the multi-mix is the same as the original recordings because there is no digital base to the multi-mix (see my previous posts about the technical aspects of live mixing for more details). And when you do that, you get comments like these: 

1 hour ago, IWantTheFame said:

No. I hate the sound of backup singers, it sounds so tacky to me. I'd rather her use the studio backing vocals, and if she's gonna dance her ass off I'd rather her sing live over a track than have her sounding out of breath the entire time 

If Gaga were to do it, Bad Romance for instance, the perfect digitised popsong you'd know and love, would sound completely different because the beat would be created live on the spot by the musical director (who's usually also the keyboard player or is next to the keyboard player) and all of the other instruments would be played live. So no studio compression, no digital "extras"... So what you end up with is the heavy industrial digital masterpiece that is Bad Romance remixed. And regular concert goers don't want that. They want the songs they know and love, performed live. They don't want it to sound completely different to what they know. And then you get comments like "she sounds completely different on her record." 

And it's not like we don't know she isn't an amazing live vocalist. She IS. But she (mainly) makes digitally driven electronic music, so it needs to be digitally brought to the audience as well if she wants anything thats remotely close to her original songs.

[lego 44,165]

10 minutes ago, jojuun said:

Those are not backup vocalists, that a freaking choir. And Michael is SITTING DOWN. Gaga does that all the time during her acoustic songs. It's not possible to get these types of vocals for a dance song, unless it's slowed down (like Poker Face acoustic).

Why is everyone on here so clueless about the technical part of performing? 

 

 Can we just have our own opinion on this or is it MUST for you to be the one who is always right?

Freedom 90 is a funky/dance song.

Those are his backup singers, they go everywhere with him for years and HE IS NOT ALWAYS SITTING DOWN

He's walking, running and dancing and delivering perfect vocals. 

 

 

compare to album version

 

 

Backup vocals are just enchancing the song.