Milli Vanilli Redux?

Forget truth in advertising... how about truth in "live" performances?

We have now learned that neither Faith Hill nor Jennifer Hudson performed live at Sunday's Super Bowl. This, after finding out that Yo-Yo Ma and Itzhak Perlman didn't perform live at the Obama inaugural either. If they tell me tomorrow Bruce Springsteen was on tape, there's no hope.

What right does a network have to present an apparently "live" performance before, during or after an apparently "live" (God, who knows?) football game with no indication that the singer is lip-synching to an earlier-recorded version?

Here, the defense, as quoted by the Associated Press from the producer of the pregame show, Rickey Minor, a producer and music director of American Idol: "That's the right way to do it. There's too many variables to go live. I would never recommend any artist go live because the slightest glitch would devastate the performance." (Ignore the word choice and wrong subject-verb agreement.)

What is this guy really saying? Professional performers, paid a king's ransom to do their stuff on the most-watched telecast of the year, cannot be relied upon to get it right, so we get it right for them. And furthermore, the audience doesn't know or care, so doesn't deserve the courtesy of a heads-up. I'll bet that if you polled the audience as to whether Hill and Hudson were singing live, more than 99 percent would answer "live." And apparently, according to ABC News, the Super Bowl lip-synching has pretty much been standard operating procedure since 1994.

Late last month, The New York Times provided a pseudo-scientific explanation for why Ma, Perlman and company couldn't play live at the Obama inaugural, having to do with potential "broken piano strings, cracked instruments and wacky intonation" caused by the freezing temperatures and wind on the Mall Jan. 20. They could sell that because, frankly, how many people know enough about the fragility of classical instruments and the variability in tone that extreme weather conditions might cause to dispute that? But, come on, Tampa's weather was in the 60s, there are Teleprompters for the words, and, again, these are supposed to be professionals. That's why they're at the Super Bowl.

And when things do go wrong, or the forecast "glitch" does occur, sometimes it adds to the charm and the memorable nature of a live occasion. Anyone old enough to have watched John F. Kennedy's inauguration remembers (probably with a few tears) the scene when the 87-year-old Robert Frost could not see the words on the page of his poem written for the occasion due to his failing eyesight and the bright sunshine off the snow, and instead recited "The Gift Outright" from memory. Far from a "glitch," it was a noble, human moment in a glorious inauguration ceremony.

Finally, don't these producers feel they owe the audience anything? Or, is it just how much they can get over on us? If they're not going to allow the "live" performers to perform live, how hard is it to tell us? "Performance by Jennifer Hudson previously recorded." Newspapers and magazines certainly know how to inform readers that "portions of the above article appeared previously in" another publication, or that photographs are not what they appear to be: "photo illustration by the New York Post."

The bottom line is: they don't want to take a chance on a live performer, no matter how professional, and they don't want to tell us when they don't. They want us to think we're getting The Real Deal when we're actually getting Memorex. And how far from Milli Vanilli is that, really?

Comments

[janeinmia]

I really hate this new Idol way of doing things. Makes you wonder -- are concerts live? Are AI final contestants really live? Are all these televised performances not only pre-recorded, but tweeked in the production studio? Is there any corner of the music industry that still has a shred of integrity?

[liberalmedia]

I agree that they never should have told people it was going to be a live performance (I'm assuming they publicized it that way? I don't really remember ever hearing that...) but there are other practical reasons for not doing it live in such a large venue.

I've sung the National Anthem in a venue holding about 65,000 people before. The stadium management insisted on having it recorded beforehand. The simple reason being, the reverberation of the music and the singing itself had proved too distracting in previous performances. After some really disastrous incidents--- they just made pre-recording it the norm.

And while I was annoyed at first, once I actually got up there, I realized that they were absolutely right. Even though I had on an earpiece (designed so I could only hear the music), I could still hear the "echo" of my voice as I was singing--- and it was INCREDIBLY distracting. I would have never been able to sing it properly if I'd tried to do it live.

Now, if I'd had a very loud rock band behind me and was surrounded with monitor speakers (which is what bands who do stadium concerts have)--- it might be a different story. ;-) But I'm going to give both Faith and Jennifer a break.

[jqcitizen]

Lip-Syncing is acceptable if it is well known in advance. Pretending it was a live performance is a coverup.

While it may have been somewhat of an embarrassment to Justice Roberts and Pres. Elect Obama, the oath of office was administrated.

That little glitch was priceless and only proves that at least two individuals in this government are not Milli Vanillies.

I happen to like the 'Warts and all' people.

[LisaLisa1234]

When I sang the National Anthem at Edison Field, there were only about 15 or 20 thousand, not millions & millions watching; however, if I can sing it live, why can't they? They sing live at their concerts all the time!

I loved Jennifer Hudson's performance, but part of why I loved it was that I was impressed by what I thought was a live performance. Knowing now that it was recorded ahead of time, I'm not so impressed. Almost anyone can sound good in a recording studio.

I totally understand the musicians at the inauguration. Watching Aretha sing made my vocal chords hurt. I can barely speak in 20 degree weather, much less sing. Far much less sing well! If my little instrument is affected by the cold, I can only imagine what it would do to Yo-Yo Ma's cello.

Please, though--enough with the Milli Vanilli references. They did not sing on their own ALBUM. It was fraud. Big difference.

[Venee]

With all due respect to even mention Yo Yo Ma and Perlman in a blog with Milli Vanilli in the title is just insulting at best. Please Please before writing about what you know little of do just a tiny search on these icons in the classical music world. Perlman and Ma could do a flawless performance any day of the week with their arms tied behind their backs. They have spent lifetimes doing them. Accoustic instruments like the cello and violin will not stay in tune in that type of weather. Having a daughter who has been studying the violin for most of her life (9 of 12 years) we have to take actual steps to take care of it in the winter months by using a contraption called a Damipt to keep the humidity levels up so the violin does not crack or warp. The insinuation is that these virtuosos faked it because there was no gurantee they would be flawless. That could not be further from the truth. Again had you done some research on them ,you would not have even mentioned them in this article. You may have noticed that the orchestra that played at another event had carbon stringed instruments (they stuck out because they are black) Perlman and Ma chose not to use that type because they would have been a distraction. They were there to honor the event not BE the main event.

[Paris68]

"If they tell me tomorrow Bruce Springsteen was on tape, there's no hope."

Ahem, funny you should mention that, Ruth:

http://www.thedailyswarm.com/headlines/not-playing-live-story-continues-even-e-street-band-was-faking-it-superbowl/

If it helps, Bruce was actually singing, but they were just pretending to play.

[listeningpost]

Read this link. It should end the conversation.
Perhaps a blog from an event producer is in order.

[Dustee]

What link?

[gc2332]

And not coincidentally enough, Bruce's vocals were the worst part of the performance. When he wasn't shouting at the top of his lungs or out of breath from running all over the stage, he was pretty badly out of tune. Which is fine for rock and roll, but let's not pretend his performance was some kind of gold standard just because he chose to sing live. Thank god they didn't ask him to try and shout/sing the Star Spangled Banner live. Then everyone would be complaining about how bad it was and asking why they didn't go with a pre-recorded version.

[Venee]

Thank you! I'm glad someone pointed this out I agree with you 100%!!!

[weareas1]

You probably wouldn't like Bob Dylan either -- or even Billie Holliday, for that matter.

Hey, here's a tip: If you really like in-tune singing so much, you should check out T-Pain. no "pitchiness" there.

[Lovableloser]

As a musician, the whole thing imakes me sad, but we've been heading in this direction for a long time. Not to get too philosophical here, but the fact that most singers we see on TV are not actually singing -- LOL! -- is symbolic of our current media entertainment culture. And they wonder why kids are not watching TV? Why should they? Everything increasingly feels manufactured, marketed, processed, and FAKE.

No wonder the internet and reality TV programming are becoming increasingly popular.

One poster made a great point -- seek out REAL music performed by REAL musicians in a REAL venue. In REAL time. That means "small", and intimate. That's what I'm doing these days. And simply not bothering to tune into the Super Bowl. Marketers and Publicists: deal with THAT!

[WaimeaWidow]

Let it go, Ruth.

[deeppeace]

And one more thing: Milli Vanilli never sang their own stuff. They lip-synched others' work. Shame on you. Go fight a battle that deserves fighting.

[deeppeace]

Two major performances of anthems before the most widely watched programming of the year should be recorded. No matter how professional or experienced the artist is, there will always be the chance of flubbed lyrics, flying insects, technical glitches and a dozen other flaws in the performance.

What are you going to do, sue? You've been a lawyer too long. The world is not entirely the adversarial place you'd like it to be.

[ComradeRutherford]

All music today is a 'track-act'. Almost no top pop star does a live show.

If you see the performer doing 'dance-moves' while wearing a tiny boom mic and 'singing', then they are NOT singing live. If they are doing 'dance-moves' they can ONLY be lip-synching. It is physically impossible so sing while doing acrobatics.

[skeptaholic]

The SuperBowl wasn't the outstanding music venue you hoped it would be? It's on 15 second delay, too, so it's not really live. Santa isn't real.

[Paw1]

If you're looking for a "true" live music experience, Ruth, you need to look well beyond televised performances and most major recording acts of the current era on tour. Almost all of those performances are completely pre-recorded, partially pre-recorded or computer-adjusted on the fly to mask the inability of the performers to replicate the recorded music exactly.

Find a live music club in your area that specializes in the kind of music you like. If you live in or near a major city or college town, it won't be too hard. Local performers and national touring acts that play clubs can't afford to sound perfect live, so they hone their chops the hard way: through constant playing. The Jennifer Hudsons and Faith Hills simply don't do enough concerts to deliver a consistent level of quality in a live setting; that's why their managers are afraid to let them sing live. Springsteen has no such issue. He's been playing 4 hour concerts for decades.

As for whether this topic is relevant considering all that's going on in the world, I submit that one of the few things that the gen pop has any real control over these days is what they watch, listen to or attend. If the show you're seeing has pre-recorded elements, you should know. If the National Anthem in a sporting event is pre-recorded, you should know. You may choose to watch it or attend it anyway. But at least you'd be informed.

[eggman]

It's a stupid practice to have someone desecrate the national anthem before a sporting event. There's no logical connection between the anthem and a sporting event, but that's not my complaint -- the anthem used to encourage audience participation, like a hymn in church or the Pledge of Allegiance in the classroom, but now it's just a way for a performer to show off their vocal chops--no one could sing along to that. It's as musically interesting as singing scales and as patriotic as an American flag handkerchief.

BTW, the Milli Vanilli reference is off-base. The problem with MV was that the singers did not actually sing. If every performer who lip-synched to their own voice was knocked down there wouldn't be many pop stars left standing.

[throwit]

Puhleese. Comparing Yo Yo Ma or any proven musician to performers who never DID sing is misleading, unfair and damaging to their sterling reputations. Yo Yo Ma and the others DID perform live. Their likely imperfect performance was heard by those nearby. Few non-musicians know what a job the weather can do on voices and instruments. Would we want to hear the sound of Mr. Ma's cello splitting? Would we enjoy witnessing a vocalist's pipes being severely damaged just so we could boast that they performed live just for us? Perhaps we should focus on inept performers INCAPABLE of delivering their words live-- such as the Supreme Court Justice John Roberts. Stop perpetuating this inaccurate comparison.

[JimMan35]

My musician friends and I couldn't figure out how their instruments weren't cracking and falling apart in the cold at the Inauguration. Anyone who brings a priceless strad out into that weather would be insane. Just their bows alone are 10s of thousands of $$, if not more. OF COURSE they weren't performing it live, but I've seen Perlmann and Ma both live and they were playing.

As for the Super Bowl, those women can sing! That was their singing we were hearing. There are at least 1,001 things that can go wrong in a venue like that and there's much more enjoyment to hear the pre-produced pitch perfect versions they gave us than a live version that would be at the mercy of a multitude of factors that would reduce the quality of the performance, even IF the singers nailed every single milli-second. Give us the best possible end-product from a genuine source. That seems to have worked since the invention of amplified sound.

[Melissa]

I don't care if they were live or not. The two women were fabulous and the reaction from the people on the field was breath taking.