Riverpoet31 said:

Because at his peak he was the best live artist I've ever seen. Every J5 concert from the 60's to Motown days was live. All Jacksons tours including Destiny, Triumph and Victory were 100% LIVE. Bad tour was live.

I don't care for HiStory either but does that take away the credit he should recieve for his Bad tour and Jacksons tours in your opinion? I'd like to hear your response.

Another thing about the claim of TS. Michael did a number of tours from the 60's to 84 with his brothers that were completely live. His Bad tour was also live. The only tours that were lip synched were partly Dangerous and to a large extent HiStory. Thus your claim is false.

Riverpoet31 said:

You get up there and dance like him and we'll judge your live singing voice.

manthevan said:

Here is the answer to the question of the thread,Thanks Manthevan

No artist was able to handle Michael jacksons at his Peak.Case closed.

he used to be great , but if you take a look at his whole carreer there are fare more consistant live performers.i mean the motown 25 think with his brothers was awesome. and when half shows where mimed things spiraled downwards , too bad

i had a ticket to his o2 show, and he was excited for the rehearsals but when they showed that piece of video i was utterly disapointed. but i didnt kept too high hopes , but i would have been disapointed in september. i mean miming to a 15 year old track in rehearsal ..

But in general Michael didn't do much in the last 20 years of his career. He did a further 2 world-wide tours after Bad, which he mimed and he went on to do another 3 or 2 and half albums. If you are judging MJ on the last 20 years of his life, there wasn't much there.

But take him from the Jackson 5 era (1969) when the likes of Prince and Madonna were going to school like regurlar kids, to the Bad era then MJ was absolutely brilliant and I for one wouldn't have miss that for the world. Fortunately for me I came across MJ at almost the beginning of his career as oppose from the Thriller or Bad era and because of this I don't have the distortions over his career like the hard-core fans as well as the non-fans have who came to know him from Bad onwards, whose perceptions of Michael can seem very warped.

I was also fortunate to go to both the Triumph and Bad tours, both were brilliant shows, but I did prefer the Triumph concert.
[Edited 7/19/09 4:51am]

He started lipping later. He was older then so I excuse it and he needed to preserve his voice.
[Edited 7/19/09 5:22am]

StillDirrty said:

As a fan I didn't excuse it but understood it. The pressure (from himself and the public) to be 100% night after night and deliver the dance routines people expected made him rely more and more on backing tapes (added to that a slight deterioration in his voice). The sad thing is Michael didn't realise that when he just stood there and sang live, he was even more awe inspiring.

Swa

seeingvoices12 said:

Not necessarily, presuming you mean 84-88 his peak, i consider this period to be Prince's.

No one compared to Prince at this point live. MJ pails in comparison.

Im sure many agree so, your words are flawed.

I was too young to see him in concert but based on footage I've downloaded and youtube I prefer his later performances. He did more moves during Billie Jean's dance break on History Tour than what he used to do. & on that tour he did this cool move during Thriller in Munich. & the Superbowl performance, MTV VMA '95 (I think) were all later.I do think the Motown Performance will always be one of his best though.

WetDream said:

I consider the Triumph tour to be MJ's peak actually. However I agree that one could argue that Prince was even better but that's really more a question of what style you prefer. MJ, Prince, Stevie Wonder and James Brown etc all were/are amazing live acts.

StillDirrty said:

you're obviosly more in to the dance than the music aspect if you say that...

manthevan said:

Well I can listen to his music anytime. But when I'm watching him I want to see him DANCE & command the stage like no other! Nobody does it like him. He was and always will be the best imo!

StillDirrty said:

well each to his own but it's a completely different thing to hear someone sing live and interact with the audience and make slight ajustment in the moment depending on the state of mind and emotion than to listen to a studio recording.

He struggled with larygitis for years, so that played a part in the miming. We all know the man could sing.

purplesweat said:

Exactly.

He could sing live. But Michaels shows were all about HIM. Not the instruments he could or couldn't play - the focus was on him. His vocals and his moves. Pressure is high. And he didn't lip sync FULL shows. I am not a fan of lip syncing but I am a fan of Michael and to say from 1969 - 2009 most of his shows were prerecorded lip synced concerts is false. He in my opinion was the best most entertaining live performer of all time. His shows were a performance constantly and the focus was always on HIM.

The "largest part of his career" miming is a totally false claim. He lip synced for some performances on tv, some of the history tour and dangerous tour. He had to put on full shows with song and dance, and to save himself he had to lip sync sometimes...

manthevan said:

To me it doesn't make a difference because I could never be in the audience especially since I wasn't going all the way to London to see him. I regret not getting a chance to ever see him though. But I think he got better as he got older. Thriller and before I don't consider him a man yet. Then with Bad he was more masculine and seemed to be more aware of himself and confident. That might not be true it's just my observation. But I think that's why I felt that his stage presence increased with age. Also, I don't think with Michael it's ok to dismiss the dancing aspect. It plays a huge part to who he is. He got better as a dancer imo when older and he was more experienced on how to entertain people hence the title Greatest Entertainer of All Time.

manthevan said:

Exactly. That's why I rather watch a low-key concert like the J5 in Mexico 1975 than something like the History tour. The former is so real and intimate, Michael is still adjusting to his new voice, whilst the latter it is if he is just going through the motions.

I guess it does come down to tastes. Growing up I only listened to a few of the Jackson 5 songs because I had his Essential Collection. But the Jackson 5 is just too boring for me and I care only about Michael.

Comparing Michael's shows with his brothers and the "Bad" tour, I prefer that Michael though the Michael I grew up with did those stage shows where people didn't mind it if he lipped half the time.

I attended both the Victory Tour and The Bad Tour. Michael Jackson was no doubt singling live. When I watched the Dangerous tour on HBO, he lip synced half of the show. From History tour to the AEG footage, he has been lip syncing. it is unforty=unate because Michael Jackson was one of the best live performers ever. Maybe his health was beginning to decline after 1993 and is voice could no longer stand that kind of work out.

totaldiva said:

It's a complete mystery why he did more lip-syncing as he got older. I doubt it was just laryngitis (even if it was confirmed he suffered from it). Hell he might've had bronchitis. Who knows, maybe there's more to the story. Maybe he was lazy, I don't know.

But from 1969-1989, he was one of the greatest live performers of his generation no doubt, he still put on great shows for the Dangerous tour tho. I'm a little bit 50/50 on the HIStory thing tho. And who knows what this "rehearsal" from this year would show (but why would they even release a rehearsal in the first place besides making MONEY? Don't make sense to me).

I can imagine that it's very exhausting to sing live and do heavy dance routines the way he did. His body can't be expected to hold up like it used to. Also, it's better so that he didn't develop polyps on his vocal chords. That happens to a lot of singers who try to do too much.

Timmy84 said:

Besides the good basic reason of StillDirrty, my guess would indeed also be vocal chords damage. The expanded Bad Tour from 2 full years and maybe some more months/weeks paid it's toll. The next tour had much more lip-synching already.
The way how closing parts in songs like "Man In The Mirror" and "Earth Song" are sung takes much strength to achieve on stage, hence combined with dancing.
His signature style became that more forced way of singing and though i'm not informed how much he took care of his voice (training, medical tests, nutrition, etc) , that might've been another factor.

Literally.....

PurpleMedley122 said:

Yikes! my eyes

Rogue588 said:

Prince does that shit too

You have seen how Prince was dancing during the Parade and Lovesexy tour?

Was he playbacking at those tours? NO

Dancing a lot is no excuse for lipsynching an entire concert.

Timmy84 said:

I saw him at his 30th anniversary concert, here in NY. Did he lip-sync, yes, he did for some numbers. I think most of it had to do with him being the perfectionist that he was. With all of the dancing he does I believe that he wanted to give "Billie Jean", in exactly the same way they heard it on wax, you can't really do that, jumping around. I don't think he would could have lived with himself had he sung that live, and a note had been sung out of place. One also has to remember, he could have stood there and sang, "London Bridge is falling down", and nobody would have cared, myself included. All people wanted was the chance to see Michael Jackson, live. He has developed that kind of rep, for being in the business for as long as he has. I get more offended at people who claim not only to know good music, but claim to be able to sing, and then end up lip syncing. To me that is allot worse.

Riverpoet31 said:

Shockingly, i only just caught a Parade show barely weeks ago and my god its astounding.

If you ask me, he dances and moves more in these two tours then any MJ show i have seen and thats all of 'em (tours). I get exhausted watching the Prince shows! and your right, not once was he playbacking.

It furthers the point.