midnightmover said:

uh dude he was there. HE WOULD KNOW.

BoOTyLiCioUs said:

I'm going to resist the temptation to give this post the treatment it deserves. Read my post again. Especially the bit in bold.

midnightmover said:

why don't you resist from coming to this forum. All you do here is harass people. There's nothing wrong with having a difference of an opinion but you call others idiots or loons if they don't agree with anything you say. Stop being so self righteous.

BoOTyLiCioUs said:

Yes, I was there. Here is the thing, when they televised it on TV, they did allot of editing. Whitney for example, looked worse in person than she did live....more gaunt in appearance. They certainly did edit some of the performances, I would not be surprised if they edited some vocals. But, back to my original point, sang live for most of the concert, except for parts and I do mean parts of "Billie Jean", and "Rock My World".
[Edited 8/4/09 12:29pm]

BoOTyLiCioUs said:

I have called no one an idiot or a loon here.

shorttrini said:

Well, a clip did emerge of YRMW from the first night when he was singing half the song live and sounding AWFUL! It seems like on the second night he gave up and mimed it instead. Yet more proof that Michael only mimes out of NECESSITY. I take no pleasure from saying it, but the plain truth is Michael could no longer hack it as a live singer. He could only sing fragments here and there.

midnightmover said:

Hey, I was just happy to be there. He could have sang "Old Macdonald", and I would not have given a hoot. But, the songs that I mentioned are the one's that he did lip-sync.

shorttrini said:

I saw unedited videos of MJ performing "You Rock My World" and I have to agree that he sounded off in the parts he sung live. He did sing some songs live but most were mimed. A lot of shit was edited for the shows.

shorttrini said:

That's what I figured. I guess the two of us have different standards.

midnightmover said:

Most who have been lifelong MJ fans (like myself) would probably haven't cared because he was on the stage. It's kinda like Elvis for some people. Even when Elvis was fat and stoned from prescription pills, fans still went nuts for him so it wasn't any different for Michael. Same with Marvin and his final years when his last tour was plagued by drug addiction and illness. It's like some stars are "superhuman" when they hit the stage no matter how fragile they appear to be.

midnightmover said:

Here is how I look at it...Yes, he is a star and yes, he is one of the greatest entertainer's in the world, but he is also human. He, like everyone else on this planet, is entitled to have an off day. If your standards are one's in which you expect someone NOT to make a mistake, i.e. a bad note, then that's on you. I kinda like it when a performer, screws up, once in awhile, it shows a more human side to them.

shorttrini said:

Well, in that case you'll love this performance. If bad notes and screw ups are your thing then Michael certainly gives value for money here.

I haven't seen Madonna or MJ live yet. And if MJ were alive I'd pick him over Madonna (and I actually like Madonna).

MJ's often a really good performer.

Although I can't find the thread but there's a thread with him performing in a chair. I thought it was just dreadful.

He's like Prince... When he's good, he's really good. But every once in a while you get something....less than that.




I personally think Prince was a better performer, and I'd take a Springsteen or Lori Anderson performance over him anyday (if he were alive), but he certainly ain't bad.

It's funny how a television clip can be seen as 100% proof that someone was sounding bad or whatever. What you hear when you are there and what you hear of the show on TV is almost never the same. It's not often they are able to transfer the sound correctly and a lot of sound gets lost on the way... I have seen shows on TV that have sounded really bland or crappy, but have then been told by someone who was there working that it sounded nothing like that live. Besides, TV usually includes a lot of editing, unsuccessful at times.


Imo, being a great live artist doesn't solely mean being able to sing and have a great live voice. MJ had much more that made him a great live artist.

Sometimes I go to a concert in order to see and hear a great artist/musician with a great voice and/or mad instrument skills.
Sometimes I go to a concert just to see an artist live in action, to feel the energy and get entertained.

VenusBlingBling said:

I presume you're posting this as a riposte to that clip I posted of MJ sounding awful singing "I'll Be There". The fact that you could do so with a straight face is amazing. What you hear there has nothing to do with editing or sound transfer. It's the sound of a voice that is, to use the technical term, ..... fucked!

Please stop the crazy excuses.

midnightmover said:

Nah, I haven't read all posts here and haven't watched that clip so I wasn't responding to you exactly. It was just a comment I wanted to make since it's been stated here several times that people saw/heard a performance on TV and use it to judge the quality of a performance/performer. You can't always do that. Sometimes yes. And I know MJ lip synched a lot in the last 2 decades and that he didn't always sound great. I was just saying. Sheesh.


.
[Edited 8/4/09 15:50pm]

VenusBlingBling said:

Sorry, but TV broadcasts give a perfectly good representation of what a singer can do. If anything you can see and hear more clearly when you watch it on TV coz you're not so overwhelmed with the atmosphere and the adrenaline rush of being there.

Pathetic Thread

Out of any artist that could ever be accused of not having actual singing talent, Michael Jackson is really not the one. And considering he was a great live artist since the age of 5 when there was absolutely no miming involved (except for shows like Soul Train and such where they force artist to lip synch), and most people could plainly see over the years that the man could sing and dance, it's really silly to read someone try to continue to argue the point

co-sign with the patheticness of the thread.

eta: as for showing a live clip (after arguing that he doesn't sing live but, whatever) of a song that he's been singing since he was a child....so you should ask yourself "no one ever said he couldn't sing the song before, why does he sound bad now? I wonder if something is wrong with him?"

And I can concur with you, maybe like Mariah, he aged and his voice got fucked....and that's sad. Doesn't mean he wasn't talented.
[Edited 8/4/09 18:27pm]

But why does this insanity continue even after this GREAT entertainer has passed on? Most people (music insiders, producers, etc) know MJ is the GREATEST n have expressed this fact, so who are these people on here trying to convince and why?? I don't get it. If Prince or Madonna are any other star had died I would try to talk about their great accomplishments, NOT the few times they were not up to par.

Some people like to be negative and argue all the time. Hell I'm even one of them sometime, but even I can look at simple fact and reality.

Michael Jackson was a great live entertainer for decades, and then he fell apart, got tired, had addictions and demons and wasn't as good. Shit happens and we're all human.

Shit, let it had been me and when I had my first hundred mil, I would have waved my fans goodbye, bought an island, and you would have never seen me again. Hell the thought of working until I'm 65 or older and not even making millions gets me pissy. People think oh his job was easy, because he was very rich and famous, but bottom line it was a job, and a physically demanding, emotionally draining one. I think he was drained, and he was tired of all the bullshit in his life, and he just wanted to settle down and have some kids and be happy and peaceful and he could never get to that point in his life. And that's why he is dead now.

Prince doesn't have the type of voice MJ did and his songs are not as vocally acrobatic I'm a huge fan, but that is just the truth. He isn't known for technically choreographed routines that people always want to see. He can have a simple concert playing guitar and piano and vibe because that's his thing. Apples and Oranges.

Now can we let MJ just rest in peace now and stop fussing over foolishness. There's more than ample evidence that he sang live and was highly entertaining for most of his career.

'nuff sed.

BklynBabe said:

Co-sign. Regardless of what happened with MJ's live shows in later years, he was already hailed years ago as a great live performer anyways.

midnightmover said:

And please stop posting the one clip on various posts as you're be all and end all that Michael was a crap live singer. You know that for every one bad performance you post others can be posted right along with it that show him in great form.

Do we really need to have these pointless and endless discussion over and over again. It's one thing to be looking for enlightenment or an alternative point of view, and another to just seem to be provoking and have an axe to grind.

Swa

midnightmover said:

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Do you know anyone who works with this?

Swa said:

LOL! What are you talking about? I've NEVER posted that clip before. This is a clip from mid 1997. The other awful clip I posted was from 1996. These are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT performances from about 9 months apart. The man clearly had a fucked up throat which explains why he had to mime most of the time. This is real talk, baby. If you can't take it, don't read it.

VenusBlingBling said:

No, ALL THE TIME! We're not living in the nineteenth century when sound recording was new. You guys are so illogical it's not even funny.

midnightmover said:

Could you please answer my question? And calm down! It's not like all the clips you've posted are from this millenium, so stuff have changed and improved. Plus I'm just saying what I have been told by ppl working with these things, ok. I'm sure they know what they are talking about. Do you happen to know anyone or are you just making your own conclusions?

VenusBlingBling said:

Just to show how patient I can be, I'm going to dignify this silly defence with a response. You have made an ILLOGICAL deduction based on something someone once told you that you misunderstood. For instance I know that Bruce Springsteen's voice is not as good as it used to be because I've seen plenty of footage of him and it's blindingly obvious his voice is thinner and less solid. Now, when I saw him live I didn't notice this. Same goes for Susanna Hoffs of the Bangles. Her voice never really recovered from an injury she got in 1997. Compare live recordings/ TV footage from before and after and you can clearly hear it. But again, when I saw the Bangles live I didn't notice it so much. Now if I was an ILLOGICAL person, I'd say "Holy shit! The TV stations are somehow making Bruce and Susanna sound worse than they did before!" But since I'm a LOGICAL person I know that actually the TV is showing me the truth, but at the live shows the speakers were blaring out the music at such EAR SPLITTING LEVELS that you just don't notice the details so much. You're also surrounded by excited people which means you're buzzing a little too.

Just think for a second. These people were filmed plenty of times when they were younger. If TV is sabotaging them now, why wouldn't it have done the same thing then? Plus, why does it only effect them? I can't find any footage of Marvin Gaye or Gladys Knight sounding like their throats are fucked. Or Justin Timberlake or NeYo even. Again, I'd ask you to watch this clip of MJ. On the second verse his voice is cracking. Badly. No TV station can make a voice sound like that. Just use your ears and be honest with yourself.

midnightmover said:

@ what age did MJ develop the 'goat vibrato'.

That sounded woeful!

mj was a control freak

i would've paid money to watch him tied up singing the phone book on stage, no bands, no pyrotechniccy crap. even ditching the dancing.

o ye of little faith.