Madonna / great "live" sound at Super Bowl 2012

[satellitedog]

Not many people - in any art form/profession - are natural born geniuses, and Madonna is a perfect example of that. Without critique from practitioners of any trade or art, and a reaction from the critiqued artist there is no improvement. Madonna is not reading this thread most likely, but some people who work in pop music surely do, and they can process the criticism and make use of it, should they happen to work with a similar act in the future. Clever people learn from other's mistakes, so criticism should be greeted as it takes the time to find mistakes to learn from.

I am subscribed to a U2 fan forum, and it is deadly boring and utterly annoying to read the fantalk that laps up anything without criticism.

[Thomas W. Bethe]

I thought the performance was GREAT!!! Considering all the things that could go wrong whoever put it all together deserves a pat on the back and a FAT check for their efforts.

As to lip syncing... would you sing LIVE in front of 110 million people??? and maybe forget the words or go completely blank as so many singers of the national anthem have done recently??? Lots of stress, lots of things that could go wrong from a performance standpoint as well as from a technical stand point. Can you imagine her wireless mic going bad 30 seconds into the opening number???? I think they were right to do a playback and have her lip sync it. The whole show depended on what they had done in rehearsals. What if Madonna suddenly blanked or started singing something other than the lyrics they had rehearsed. Not only would she look bad so would the 600 OTHER people on the field. The whole event could have been a complete cluster f##k. (if you don't know what that term means you have never been in the armed forces)

Anyway the game was exciting and so IMHO was the half time event.

I doubt if any of the nay sayers would do any better....YMMV

[Kaoz]

Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe

As to lip syncing... would you sing LIVE in front of 110 million people??? and maybe forget the words or go completely blank as so many singers of the national anthem have done recently??? Lots of stress, lots of things that could go wrong from a performance standpoint as well as from a technical stand point. Can you imagine her wireless mic going bad 30 seconds into the opening number???? I think they were right to do a playback and have her lip sync it. The whole show depended on what they had done in rehearsals. What if Madonna suddenly blanked or started singing something other than the lyrics they had rehearsed. Not only would she look bad so would the 600 OTHER people on the field. The whole event could have been a complete cluster f##k. (if you don't know what that term means you have never been in the armed forces)

Where do you draw the line? You say it's ok to fake a performance to a certain amount of people, how low are you willing to let that bar drop before you call it for what it is?

Great performers (which Madonna undoubtedly once was) perform under pressure, no matter what field of work they're in.

[creegstor]

Originally Posted by kennybro

Personally, I would have loved, loved if she would have come out with a band and sang some of her better tunes, live. Who cares about her voice? She never really could sing, but like Marilyn, she always had a unique thing there.

She always had very good songs, IMO. The best that the cheezy dance genre had to offer.

I'm a huge huge Madonna fan and I agree with this (well... except for the "can't sing" part. ok she's not always "on" live but she's a really good interpreter of what a song needs vocally and has great tone and attitude - two key ingredients for making great records)

But this "performance" sucked. Plain and simple.

She should have some out and given it sox with a great band instead of doing slow, crickety cartwheels with a bunch of no-talent hacks backing her up. She had an opportunity here and she blew it.

[Thomas W. Bethe]

Originally Posted by Kaoz

Where do you draw the line? You say it's ok to fake a performance to a certain amount of people, how low are you willing to let that bar drop before you call it for what it is?

Great performers (which Madonna undoubtedly once was) perform under pressure, no matter what field of work they're in.

It is NOT about faking it - it is about the whole performance going into the toilet quickly if the performer is having a bad day or flubs. Even the best of the best performers have bad days. Why chance that in front of 110 million people. It is different singing in a stadium or arena - people will forget your flubs or vocal lapses but not when it is on TV and the next day on YouTube. Look at all the controversy over MIA flipping the bird to the home audience. Look at Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction" people are still talking about that and most people KNOW that it was done for a reason and that the reason was to gain NOTORIETY which it did perfectly. I am not a performer but I know if I was I would be pretty shaky having to remember the words to the song at the same time worrying about a million other things.

YMMV

[Kaoz]

Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe

It is NOT about faking it - it is about the whole performance going into the toilet quickly if the performer is having a bad day or flubs. Even the best of the best performers have bad days. Why chance that in front of 110 million people. It is different singing in a stadium or arena - people will forget your flubs or vocal lapses but not when it is on TV and the next day on YouTube. Look at all the controversy over MIA flipping the bird to the home audience. Look at Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction" people are still talking about that and most people KNOW that it was done for a reason and that the reason was to gain NOTORIETY which it did perfectly. I am not a performer but I know if I was I would be pretty shaky having to remember the words to the song at the same time worrying about a million other things.

YMMV

With smart phones, every performance is potentially on the tv or the net hours afterwards, so that shouldn't make a difference.

We're talking about lip syncing - I don't see what someone flipping the bird or showing a boob has to do with it.

The singer doesn't have to worry about anything other than singing, once they're on stage they just have to nail their performance and that's it.

As for the whole performance going down the toilet - that's why the people who do these shows get paid the big bucks - because they're professionals and are paid not to screw up.

Why bother paying a singer who isn't going to sing? They may as well of put a puppet up there.

[Papanate]

People...seriously...Madonna didn't Lip Sync because of nerves. The NFL makes it mandatory and have since the 1980's.

[Waltz Mastering]

Originally Posted by Papanate

People...seriously...Madonna didn't Lip Sync because of nerves. The NFL makes it mandatory and have since the 1980's.

That's not true.

Recently, the Peas, the Who, Springsteen, Petty, Prince, Stones, McCartney did not lip sync.

[Papanate]

Originally Posted by Waltz Mastering

That's not true.

Recently, the Peas, the Who, Springsteen, Petty, Prince, Stones, McCartney did not lip sync.

Yes they did. All of them.

[Ernest Buckley]

I actually watched the half time show again because of this thread...

With that said, Madonna has always been about theatrics... I even went to one of her shows around 8 years ago here at MSG in NYC so... it was an all out show. Honestly, I thought it was terrible and not because I don`t like her tunes because I do like her songs! I don`t like the theatrics.... and thats exactly who she is as a "live" entertainer.

I was talking to a group of people about this yesterday and several women thought I was putting her down for being an older woman. It has nothing to do with that. The last time I saw Tina Turner around 3-4 years ago, she was rocking and she was actually singing and dancing! I love Tina Turner. To me, Madonna cannot hold a candle to Tina Turner. This is where I`m coming from. I guess I was expecting an actual live performance from Madonna but thats not who she is.

[Ernest Buckley]

Originally Posted by brill bedroom

I just feel that it's silly to judge a superbowl halftime show on a musical scorecard. It's just not what it's about. It's a spectacle designed to entertain middle America, it has nothing to do with music. If any of us were in charge of the audio and getting that insane production to actually work with the set up time involved (or transition time, I suppose), I am certain that lip-synching would be the least of our worries. Just from a production standpoint, you'd be thrilled that Madonna didn't decide to sing live.

She was great, age has nothing to do with it. She put on a big show.

The sound was great and the overall production was incredible. When you consider the amount of people involved, the sound, the visual, etc... it was a daunting task that I could never imagine coordinating so for that it deserves lots of credit and I agree now after viewing it again, its silly to judge it from an artistic performance... its not about that. It really is for the masses and that does not necessarily mean art or talent...

[Ernest Buckley]

Originally Posted by Steve_B

Being a few months older than Madonna this thread is making me feel old. It is funny how no one mentioned Prince’s age, another child of ’58.

50s are the new 30s.

The year of 58

Its not about age, its about knowing when you are no longer capable of performing. As I mentioned above, Tina Turner was still rocking the last time I saw her and she was 68? 69? at that time...

Madonna was always about theatrics and her shows are all about dancing, lip syncing and lots of other talented people on stage making her look great. What I saw the other night was a performer who was in over her head and looked like she didn`t belong. That may sound harsh but I was expecting vintage Madonna and if she cannot deliver that, then she should change her act, literally.

Keith Jagger, Steven Tyler, Tina Turner were all rocking hard when they were 58. Again, it has nothing to do with age, it has to do with knowing when you no longer have the goods and knowing when to change it up or hang it up.

[Ernest Buckley]

Originally Posted by edva

Musically, yuk, and I detest the effects on the vocal. Surprised no other comments here on that. Surely people can't like that effect? Or is it just me? Ah well, I am not aging as gracefully as she.........

Two things: the vocals were pre-recorded so the effects didn`t bother me, it bothered me that she wasn`t singing. As for aging with grace... I think performers like Madonna and J-Lo have to look good, its part of their act. They also have the $$$ to invest in personal trainers and cooks. Unlike you and me who are most likely working full time jobs and have to get our asses off to workout somehow and stay motivated on our own and oh yeah, don`t forget, we have to cook a healthy dinner after all that.

These entertainers live in a completely different reality than 99% of us so don`t be too hard on yourself.

[Kenny Gioia]

Originally Posted by TheKnow

Of course Madonna is selling like crazy on iTunes Kenny...that's because she is pretty great really.

But she was "pretty great" last week. Bunch of sheep.

Originally Posted by TheKnow

And no...I'm sure that she doesn't need guys like you that act like you have a right to criticize other folks art...you actually don't...you do it because you can, but in all fairness , anyone publicly criticizing another person's livelihood...withot a VERY good reason, is just plain wrong dude...you need to grow up a little...especially since, I assume, you are also an artist of sorts.

Of course I have a right to criticize art. We all do. And should. It's what makes better art, better.

If I was doing the half time show, I would try to better than that. That's how you become great. You look at greatness and say, "I'm going to be as good, if not, better than that."

And if it's sub-par, you say it's sub-par and I will try to never be sub-par.

If I was going to a little league game, I would praise every kid in the game. When I go to see the Yankees, and A Rod strikes out again, I have every right to yell "you stink" at the guy. It's part of the game.

And Madonna knows this.

Originally Posted by satellitedog

Not many people - in any art form/profession - are natural born geniuses, and Madonna is a perfect example of that. Without critique from practitioners of any trade or art, and a reaction from the critiqued artist there is no improvement. Madonna is not reading this thread most likely, but some people who work in pop music surely do, and they can process the criticism and make use of it, should they happen to work with a similar act in the future. Clever people learn from other's mistakes, so criticism should be greeted as it takes the time to find mistakes to learn from.

I am subscribed to a U2 fan forum, and it is deadly boring and utterly annoying to read the fantalk that laps up anything without criticism.

This.

[Ernest Buckley]

Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe

As to lip syncing... would you sing LIVE in front of 110 million people???

Without hesitation, yes.

Singing is what I do professionally and I sing to small groups to large ones. Its more nerve racking to sing to a small room because everything is heard.

The difference between singing for 100 and 1000 and 100,000 is the monitoring. Madonna was not singing for 100 million people, she was singing to a stadium of 80,000. With good monitoring, its not a problem.

[Kenny Gioia]

Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe

I thought the performance was GREAT!!! Considering all the things that could go wrong whoever put it all together deserves a pat on the back and a FAT check for their efforts.

Agreed.

Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe

As to lip syncing... would you sing LIVE in front of 110 million people??? and maybe forget the words or go completely blank as so many singers of the national anthem have done recently??? Lots of stress, lots of things that could go wrong from a performance standpoint as well as from a technical stand point. Can you imagine her wireless mic going bad 30 seconds into the opening number???? I think they were right to do a playback and have her lip sync it. The whole show depended on what they had done in rehearsals. What if Madonna suddenly blanked or started singing something other than the lyrics they had rehearsed. Not only would she look bad so would the 600 OTHER people on the field. The whole event could have been a complete cluster f##k.

Sorry. Man. That's a cop out.

Maybe we should do the same thing for Eli Manning or Tom Brady?

What if someone fumbles the ball or throws an interception? That would be pretty embarrassing. Right?

Let's pre-tape the whole game. Just in case.

If you've ever done a live event like this, you understand the RUSH of adrenaline that goes thru your body as you get up on that stage. Or put it together. It's the FEAR of FAILURE. That's the gig. It's what makes it all exciting.

I could f*ck up.

BUT I DIDN'T.

The people who are afraid of failure are the ones watching it at home on their TV.

Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe

I doubt if any of the nay sayers would do any better....YMMV

And I can't be the quarterback of the Patriots either, but I can point and laugh.

Go Giants!!!!

[Kenny Gioia]

Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe

It is NOT about faking it - it is about the whole performance going into the toilet quickly if the performer is having a bad day or flubs. Even the best of the best performers have bad days. Why chance that in front of 110 million people. It is different singing in a stadium or arena - people will forget your flubs or vocal lapses but not when it is on TV and the next day on YouTube. Look at all the controversy over MIA flipping the bird to the home audience. Look at Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction" people are still talking about that and most people KNOW that it was done for a reason and that the reason was to gain NOTORIETY which it did perfectly. I am not a performer but I know if I was I would be pretty shaky having to remember the words to the song at the same time worrying about a million other things.

YMMV

While the lip-syncing doesn't bother me too much (I knew she wouldn't sing) what would bother me is if you were correct.

If she lip synced because that's what she wanted to do, whatever. Go for it. It's your show. It's not just about singing. But if I heard she lip synced out of fear of having a bad day or forgetting her words, I would lose all respect for her.

BTW - I know one rock icon that tapes his lyrics to the monitor and flubs words all the time. But he never lip syncs. everyone gets a unique experience.

[Ernest Buckley]

When I think of great super bowl halftime shows, U2s 2002 performance comes to mind. Real singing, a band playing... it gives me chills.

[Tone Laborer]

Canned, disjointed, and oh yeah, "world peace" , please...bring back the marching band.


"Beauty's where you find it, NOT just where you bump and grind it."

Thanks Madoona, coming from you that means a lot.

[travisbrown]

Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia

Madonna is selling like mad on iTunes.

That's why acts do half times. They don't get paid, but album sales shoot through the roof.

I think this is one of those indisputable cases of "thank goodness for iTunes". It's such frictionless, instant, commerce system that I imagine the sales rate is much higher than if people had to get in their car and drive down to Walmart and hope they had the whole back catalogue in stock to choose from. Sales probably started rolling in before the second half started.

[travisbrown]

Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia

BTW - I know one rock icon that tapes his lyrics to the monitor and flubs words all the time. But he never lip syncs. everyone gets a unique experience.

Paul McCartney?

[joeq]

Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe

It is NOT about faking it - it is about the whole performance going into the toilet quickly if the performer is having a bad day or flubs. Even the best of the best performers have bad days. Why chance that in front of 110 million people. It is different singing in a stadium or arena - people will forget your flubs or vocal lapses but not when it is on TV and the next day on YouTube

I disagree

When the Beatles played on the Ed Sullivan show, they had 73 million viewers and they played live. Is there a special 'threshold' somewhere between 73 and 110 million?

The best performers are what you call Professionals. Their 'bad days' are STILL good enough to entertain a stadium with 50,000 night after night on tours lasting up to a year. If something happened to them, their empty clothes could finish the gig.

Madonna lip-syncs all of her gigs, it's about spectacle and dancing, her lip-synching "doesn't count" in this sense. It has nothing to do with the "pressure" of the 'awesome' Super-Bowl.

When bands like the Who and the E-Street band mime over tracks however it is beyond pathetic to me. These decisions are clearly NOT driven by 'performance anxiety' on the part of the Artists, they are pros. It is driven by the Suits who are trying to justify their preposterous salaries pretending that something "bad" will happen to the commercials that are airing just before and after the halftime show should the music 'sound bad'.

I agree with Kenny, if they let the players play the game, they should let the musicians play the song.

Considering how BAD the Frankenstein approach of this hybrid thing of some things live and some things recorded actually HAS sounded in the last decade of Superbowls, I think it is high time to return to the idea of letting the band play. It could not be worse than the travesties we hear every year.

Madonna worked better, IMO, because she was pretty much 100% canned, not a hybrid approach.

I am not a performer but I know if I was I would be pretty shaky having to remember the words to the song at the same time worrying about a million other things.

If the Superbowl was your first Gig maybe. You are imagining yourself thrust into that spotlight with no prior career to prepare you. TV cameras are an abstract pressure. You can play to the crowd that's there, that's why TV shows have live audiences.

You are not a performer, but the kind of people who get invited to the superbowl are performers. People who have been around for a while.

If they could not have handled that pressure, they would have cracked long ago, say, when they played a TV show with "only" 3 million viewers (Leno) or "only" 10 million viewers (SNL).

[travisbrown]

Since Duran Duran came up in this thread, I went back and listened to an interview Simon LeBon gave where he talked about lip syncing. This was in 2005 right after they played (live) on Kimmel. He said that Duran Duran historically played live on tour, but for festival and tv performances they often had to play to tracks per demand of the show producers. In these cases the band would often make a joke of it by switching instruments around and hamming it up. LeBon recalls one time he irretrievably dropped his mic off the stage and burst out laughing because Wild Boys went on with out him.

He conceded that in cases where performers lip sync when they could be playing live is basically fraudulent; but when in strictly controlled and timed environments like televised productions, you often don't have a choice if you want the gig. This was about the time of the Ashley Simpson SNL debacle, and he said there was nothing more to criticize her for than anyone else. Every act who has made national and international stages has lip synced at some time, from the Beatles to Madonna.

Itzhak Perlman, Yo-Yo Ma, and Anthony McGill played to tracks at the Washington Mall for the Obama inauguration. Production call.

With Madge, I suspect that it doesn't really have to do with anxiety; she lip syncs all her shows, doesn't she. Performing is old hat to her. It's really a visual performance, makes no attempt to be . And really, which would you rather? Hear her sing for real as she bounces around on stage, or have it listenable? I'm sure it was a production agreement between her and the show producers. The less that can go wrong, the better.

[Sounds Great]

This discussion with engineers and musicians is whole lot different than the 100 million + people that actually saw the show and listened to the music would have. But of course you knew that.

If you took off your pro hat, had a beer, and just watched the show you were likely entertained. Plus I love bass and I thought the bass tracks kicked ass.

[cheu78]

Originally Posted by chessparov

If only Sharon Jones and the Dap-Kings could do a Super Bowl...

Chris

+1!!

Please REAL live music acts not fake stuff anymore!!!

Cheu

[Sounds Great]

But it is not a half time concert, it is a half time show.

Some of the best musicians, no matter how good the music, would probably bore the masses looking for a "show".

[Remoteness]

Originally Posted by cheu78

+1!!

Please REAL live music acts not fake stuff anymore!!!

Cheu

Even a real band can never be a totally live; not in the time they have to setup and strike the stage.

It's a haft time show folks; sit back and enjoy the entertainment break during the game.

[Bob Ross]

Originally Posted by Papanate

Yes they did. All of them.

So your contention is that The Who actually made a recording that sounded as awful as their Super Bowl performance did, and then mimed to it?

[jlsgear]

I kept thinking while watching this crap ... man, this can't be good for her current world tour concert ticket sales !!

btw - Let's just get one thing out of the way .. with todays digital full recall technology , there is no technical reason a band can't play live in that half time scenario .. and other bands have done it ... so enough with the excuses.

They simply decided to spent all their time/money on cheesy half baked visuals .. and couldn't have cared less about the musical content.

Yeah .. that 'World Peace' thing was something .. especially moronic given all the narcissistic "I'm Cleopatra" crapola that preceded it !!

J.

[Kenny Gioia]

Originally Posted by jlsgear

I kept thinking while watching this crap ... man, this can't be good for her current world tour concert ticket sales !!

btw - Let's just get one thing out of the way .. with todays digital full recall technology , there is no technical reason a band can't play live in that half time scenario .. and other bands have done it ... so enough with the excuses.

They simply decided to spent all their time/money on cheesy half baked visuals .. and couldn't have cared less about the musical content.

I agree. But I also don't care. Madonna has mimed thru most of her career. But at least she danced well during it. I'm actually more offended seeing Beyonce' mime thru her performances recently and not dance. yuck.

But Madonna's dancing just wasn't that good in this. So…

Originally Posted by jlsgear

Yeah .. that 'World Peace' thing was something .. especially moronic given all the narcissistic "I'm Cleopatra" crapola that preceded it !!

J.

Yeah. As soon as I saw that "World Peace" thing I thought, does Madonna think that putting that there will do ANYTHING to achieve world peace?

Or is that she wants us to know how she feels?

It just came off self-serving to me.