Members OldMattB Posted December 18, 2008 Members Share Posted December 18, 2008 I have seen several youtube-type clips of professional singers and raw audio where they just sound awful. I can't believe these people are really that bad! Any sound pros know the answer? Are these singers just concentrating on synchronizing with a track and their dancing? Does tone correction equipment make being a superstar that easy (and deceptive)? Are they just rehearsing choreography and saving their pipes? What gives? oldMattB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Andrew JD Posted December 18, 2008 Members Share Posted December 18, 2008 All of the above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SevenString Posted December 18, 2008 Members Share Posted December 18, 2008 You mean like that Britney Spears one floating around? cT_QB7tBxyg Yeah, pretty pathetic, especially considering how she USED to sing: KYoUi0Cyd88 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members OldMattB Posted December 18, 2008 Author Members Share Posted December 18, 2008 The Enrique Inglesias one is the reason for my post, but I have seen several artists doing this. oldMattB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members aliensexist112 Posted December 22, 2008 Members Share Posted December 22, 2008 yea some of them are really horrible- for example I am from bulgaria and in the Music Idol 2 here were really good live singers that were way better than the original so caller "proffesianal" "singers".I gues it is just that the celebrities don't focus too much on being that good because they can edit it and make it better... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members blackeyed28 Posted December 22, 2008 Members Share Posted December 22, 2008 The Enrique Inglesias one is the reason for my post, but I have seen several artists doing this. i thought that turned out to be a hoax, ...and it was some karoke dude instead. i think enrique even went on a national tv show (letterman, maybe) and sang that song american idol audition style (no mic, no efx, no backing track), ..and everyone agreed it couldn't be him on that track. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members grace_slick Posted December 23, 2008 Members Share Posted December 23, 2008 YIKES, I mean, I knew Britney wasn't the best singer ever, but that top clip!! HORRENDOUS! It sounds as if it's just a guide vocal while she's dancing. The early clip is quite good...she needs more control of her developing voice, but it's a good voice, you can tell. I don't really know what happened there...she seemed to stop using most of her voice and her talent when she became popular and now just uses this nothing, sort of breathy voice which she then affects with techno stuff. What a waste. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jerrye Posted December 23, 2008 Members Share Posted December 23, 2008 the spears "baby, one more time" intro seems the work of an imposter. note the vibe -- it's free form, maybe not susceptible to a click track, and therefore, not as easily lip synced. although she's no great singer, i've heard her sing live ballads, with good, yet imperfect vocals. pitch correction sounded non existent. i don't think a singer can sing at the good, yet imperfect, level and then suck to the extent of the clip. i don'y hear any/much of a chorusing/delay effect. i expect to hear that if the , because this is the effect produced when an artist sings over a recording of their own voice. there's a linda mccartney live version video also. i suspect it's fake also. the technology to record and distribute this audio -- it preceded youtube. yet these leaks are supposed to have recently surfaced? i doubt it. the true audio may suck almost this much, but i detect fakery in the clips. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members spiveslude Posted December 24, 2008 Members Share Posted December 24, 2008 Enrique Inglesias is unfortunately a pretty damn good singer. Good voice + male model looks + charismatic yet humble personality = fame. Genetics is a bitch to the rest of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ermghoti II Posted December 24, 2008 Members Share Posted December 24, 2008 i thought that turned out to be a hoax, ...and it was some karoke dude instead. He spoke about it on Howard Stern once. He said is was basically a lip-synch performance, there were no (or catastrophically inadequate) monitors. He was just yelling the lyrics, emoting effort/feel, not even trying to sing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bajazz Posted December 25, 2008 Members Share Posted December 25, 2008 Enrique Inglesias is unfortunately a pretty damn good singer. Good voice + male model looks + charismatic yet humble personality = fame. Genetics is a bitch to the rest of us.The only thing that is genetic bout this is looks, rest are developed. BTW, most models use lots of time on looks to stay models. So if you and I worked out an hour a day, got a tan, shaved and took a shower, we would appear decent too. Throw in a expensive suit and a Limo, and I bet we'd shine!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members spiveslude Posted December 29, 2008 Members Share Posted December 29, 2008 Natural metabolism, skin type, facial and body bone structure, hair type (and whether you lose it), are unfortunately genetic. But I agree, if the average person had the time and motivation to spend on their physical appearance/diet/nutrition the whole human race would be more attractive. Still doesn't mean wed look like brad pitt in his prime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.