I expect that the complete performance by musicians or actors occurs at the time of the performance and is not a mixture of a pre-recorded and a live-performance (unless noted otherwise).
I was surprised the first time I attended a stage play and found the actors wearing body mikes. I went in worried that I would not be able to hear the projection of their voices and I was relieved to see a note written in the program. Now I’m also relieved after I note voices coming from the speakers. So, I’m not discouraged by technical enhancement. I just need to know what I am experiencing so that I can attribute the performance.
In the case of Ma and Perlman, when I see their movements I expect the sound to be from those movements. Ah ha, you say, they were! No, Ma and Perlman were performing in freezing weather and produced some music. The music heard was in a studio. I do not dismiss the studio music as inferior, not at all. What I object to is the implication that the music heard was produced under such adverse circumstances.
I cannot attribute a greater skill to the performers for creating music under adverse conditions, because they didn’t do that. They used great skill to create great music under studio conditions. I just want the chance to appreciate their work under the conditions in which it was created.
When I see Perlman hanging from a rope ladder under a Huey landing in a hot zone in Iraq playing a stirring rendition of the theme from Apocalypse Now - a CGI recreation would be cute and degrading. A live performance would be Amazing!
“Very good reasons for not performing live” does not translate to “very good reasons for pretending to perform live.”
That only means that the media were complicit in the deception. I didn’t see a key title on my screen saying “this performance is recorded.”
I’m sorry, but this fails to register as any sort of argument at all. Most instances of fraud don’t result in the “world ending,” but they’re still considered wrong.
Okay, I agree that they could have made an announcement stating they’d be using the pre-recorded version (I assume if the weather warmed up (don’t know how much) that they’d have played it live.
However, they actually DID play it, crappy as it may have sounded. And I still got the ‘warmth’ you get from a live performance. And they copped to it. In this particular case, I think I would still prefer not to know until after the performance. Knowing it would have taken something away from it, for me.
“Fraud” and “wrong” are nothing but human constructs. The only reasons things are fraudulent and wrong is because they adversely affect someone in some way. If they didn’t, no one would care. The lemon car example mentioned by Vinyl Turnip a few posts back is an example of this. The person who sold such a car is fraudulent and should be held accountable for his wrongdoing. It is considered “wrong” because the buyer now has a car that doesn’t perform the way he was led to believe it would.
What I’ve been trying to figure out throughout the course of this thread is why this Yo-Yo Ma thing is such an issue for you. I can’t imagine that it impacted your finances. Did you get out of bed that morning hoping to see a televised live performance of Yo-Yo Ma? If not, then by my criteria this isn’t “wrong.” It didn’t affect you in any way, unless you clarify that it did.
As one of the masses on the mall during the inauguration, I expected everything that happened up there, to be occurring in real time. I can tell you, it was annoying enough to be standing outside that much longer to wait to hear Obama speak, but at least I could say I heard Yo-Yo Ma perform live right? No, not really.
I’m not terribly upset about it, but it is disappointing and a blot on an otherwise thrilling experience.
Not the same thing at all. Milli Vanilli mimed to someone else’s vocals.
Castaway was not marketed as a live performance, or even as a documentary. No one has any reason to believe that a movie is actually just a live feed form a camera on location. I mean come on, how could that be if it is being shown multiple times on multiple screens, with each performance exactly replicating every other? Again, a very bad analogy.
I’m with the OP, by the way. Wasn’t one of those Simpson girls roundly criticized for faking a Saturday Night Live performance? Why did this happen, if everyone but **ascenray **understands that it is S.O.P. in the industry?
I think you just took back your cultural norm then.
Out for blood? Well, this is my position: If this is S.O.P., it’s unacceptable and we should hold musicians to a different standard, one in which it is not S.O.P. to mime a live performance. Whether such an assertion on my will result in the spilling of blood is not entirely within my ken. I suspect I could persuade the American Federation of Musicians to sign on to this position, but I’m somewhat doubtful that they’d be willing to spill blood over it. I’d have to find a more militant kind of musicians’ union.
I wonder what the contract called for for this performance, It’s not like they called these guys up a week before the performance. I think the intention was always going to be to synch with a recording. January 20th in Washington DC? It’s not like it’s Miami FL, you know it’s going to be cold. I don’t think they ever had an intention of playing live.
It’s not a big deal but it is deceptive especially since it wasn’t clearly indicated that the muscians would be pantomiming. I don’t see why they didn’t just play the recording without the performers.
So what? He started a thread on an internet message board. As reactions go, that’s pretty tame.
I’m with acsenray. I didn’t know it wasn’t actually a live performance until just now. It’s somewhat disappointing to find out, and given the misunderstanding people had over it, it stands to reason they could have been up front about the fact that it was a recording we were all listening to. Part of the reason live performances are enjoyable is because you get to appreciate the skill of the artist in a more raw format - studio recordings can be redone and retouched until they sound just right. You only get one try live.
It was made in an extremely clumsy manner, then. You need to keep your apples and your oranges apart, as much a possible. Referring to Milli Vanilli as “doing this” when they in fact did something quite different is misleading at best.
Well, you can’t have it both ways. Either the following quote is accurate, or it isn’t.
I already made it pretty clear that it is unnecessary to screw with the audience’s suspension of disbelief to that degree. The vast majority of those who have watched any music outdoors or on television, in an event that isn’t designed specifically to be a paid concert of that performer’s music, know that dubbed music is a very real possibility.
The SNL performance was on television, and it was not specifically designed as a paid concert of that performer’s music. That seems to fit your criteria to a “T”.
Nope. You need to read what I said again. I said no one cared until Milli Vanilli came around. I have no idea why you put “doing this” in quotes. Do you just pretend people have said thing you wish they did. Besides that, the Milli Vanilli screw-up could do nothing but strengthen my point, so I’m not sure what you were trying to accomplish by bringing it up again.
For the record, here is my entire quote:
The fact that it happened made it a possibility. It didn’t kill her career or anything, but more people were upset than would ordinarily be. I didn’t realize that I had to list every possible exception in the history of music, just that it is very, very common in:
Almost every music video ever made
The Grammys (up until a few years after Milli Vanilli)
American Bandstand
Sould Train
Every movie version of any musical
Many (if not most) sporting events
Events taking place outside
Etc.
So the vast majority of people who watch music on television *don’t *know that a dubbed performance is “a very real possibility” then? (Quoting you again.)
And continuing to refer to movies or videos in a thread about supposedly live music is just stupid. Who the fuck thinks that movie music is being performed live? Movies are not a live medium. Way way way back when an organist would perform background music live, but nobody expects the Stones to set up in the orchestra pit for every movie that has “Sympathy for the Devil” on its soundtrack.
Just admit that you missed the second sentence, and that nothing I said about Milli Vanilli directly referenced the phrase “doing this”.
I have no idea what you’re talking about, or where I said such a thing. All I did was say there were exceptions, and you;re trying to split some ridiculously thin hairs here.
You’re really bad at quoting people. I suggest you stop.
