On Demand
A Tenor Turned Mime
The late Luciano Pavarotti has joined the ranks of Ashlee Simpson and Milli Vanilli. A new book revealed the legendary tenor and an orchestra mimed their way through a performance in 2006 at the Turin Olympics. Today, we debate whether lip-synching is ever appropriate -- and if fans are more forgiving these days. Our guests include jazz critic Garry Giddins, who has written about lip-synching for the New York Times, and William Brittelle of the lip-synched art-rock concept album Mohair Time Warp.
Tell us: When is lip-synching appropriate?
Pavarotti lip sychs Nessun Dorma at Turin Olypics, 2006
Pavarotti lip synchs with Sting at 1992 concert
More about Mohair Time Warp
- About this program
- Staff Bios »
- Contact Us »
- Latest Episode
- Internship
- Tapes and Transcripts
- Show Archive »
Features & Series
Podcast
Stay up to date.
Subscribe to the Podcast
Soundcheck's Noteworthy New York
Want to know the hottest places to go this weekend? Check out where New York's musicians go in their free time.
More
Soundcheck Blog
Go behind the scenes!
Find out what John Schaefer and the Soundcheck staff have to say about recent segments on the show.
More
Comments
It's only appropriate when some physical activity is a big part of the act - like when the singer is dancing/grinding/freaking on stage while trying to sing. Obviously then the music is secondary to the bigger spectacle. Pavarotti was merely trying to cash in and hoping no one would notice in this case.
The guest sounds like a whiner
In the film, "Across the Universe", they did not lip-synch. Most of the songs were sung live to playback for the camera and it made all the differences in some of the perfomances. It should be done more. When Old Hollywood did it, it was because of the lack of technology to eliminate background noise. New Hollywood or Broadway have no excuse.
The advent of DVD's has created an unrealistic expectation of perfection in classical performance. Could you imagine a young pianist at Carnege missing notes in a recital? Note perfection has replaced musical personality.
You don't hear music at an amplified show, you hear loud noise. At times painfully loud noise. Everything is lost. And on top of that actors often emote into their mikes as if they were speaking naturally, so their words can't be understood, as for example in MacBeth currently on Bway.
At this point, you must assume that most popular music recording are corrected with auto-tune, so the idea that lip synching is now acceptable as well is very sad. Performers become famous for looking a certain way or being a good dancer...but what about real musicians who can perform without auto-tune or lip synching? This is why the music industry is in trouble!
Give me a break! Lip synching is absolutely stealing your audience's money.
I am a web designer. I don't use just reuse the same web site for different clients. How can these artists use the same recording for different audiences?!
INAPPROPRIATE!!
I saw Steely Dan two years ago. It was exhilerating to hear "Don't Take Me Alive" performed at a higher level than the album version. It was interesting even to hear an inferior version of "Hey Nineteen" for the play to the audience.
If they had lip scynch'ed I could have stayed home and listened to the CD's.
There are so many musicians and so few of them 'make it' where they can play in front of a large audience. Why don't those who can't do it step aside for those who can? I think the answer, at least much of the time, has to do with how corporate driven music is.
If I wanted to hear a recording, I'd spend the $15 on a CD and listen at home. When I go to a live performance, I expect to hear a live performance. It doesn't matter if the performers aren't "note perfect" - my fondest memory is hearing Krystian Zimmerman playing the Chopin Bb minor Scherzo and missing the last note - didn't take away from the performance, and he self-mockingly corrected himself during the applause.
Let's be honest - the amplification of Broadway isn't about lazy performers, it's about lazy audiences. It takes concentration and attention to listen to unamplified performance - none to "tune in and out" of a loudly amplified one.
Movie soundtracks MUST be lip synched, guys! It's not just about the actors moving around. Each scene is filmed from so many different angles there would never be a consistent performance not to mention the thousands of times each singer would have to perform one song- just to get a tiny fragment of song.
How is it that with millions watching, no one detected LP's sync-ed performance? Was he that good at it?!
Do you think they had a convo back in the Agora where some guy was like, "BAH! These acoustically engineered amphitheaters are a crock! Back in my day, you had to be able to sing in an open field! By the ocean! Only the first five rows could hear and WE LIKED IT!"
Do you also want the performers to come out and say, "by the way, the leads are much ulgier than they appear here. They are wearing makeup. This guy's actually only 5'3"." The whole point of this stuff is its a show, its built on tricks and the suspension of disbelief, why would they go out of their way to point out JUST this one bit of trickery?
I agree with the comment above - these lip singing performers are products and it is more about profits than artistry. Pavarotti and whoever else makes money on his performance rather fake it than let newcomers in.
you are mistaken with the definition of LYING.
Lying contains 2 elements:
1. not telling the truth
2. intentionally deceving the other
hence, if you do tell in advance what you are doing, it is NOTa lie.
It is ridiculous for someone who is famous for singing to perform live and dance rather than sing. If you are a dancer, then dance, if you want to be a singer, then sing. Acts that are famous for their singing but lip synch while dancing at live performances are beyond rationality.
It shows how music industry has shifted away from music, and toward image, since we can electronically fix sub-par singers in a recording, as long as they look nice while dancing.
As long as it is fully disclosed that the audio for a performance is pre-recorded before the potential concert goer opens his or her wallet, it is acceptable.
He sounds good
A key plot device in "Singin' in the Rain" involved the silent film star Lili Lamar, whose coarse speech must be dubbed when talkies arrive - dubbed by Debbie Reynolds. To ice the cake, Reynolds gets to sing for herself through part of the film, but NOT when she's dubbing Lili in "Would You?" - that vocal is provided by yet another singer. So Debbie mouths the words to that tune, which is then inserted into the mouth of the croak-y Jean Hagen as Lili.
Brooks Atkinson described the theater (or was it criticism) as "Lies like truth" ...
Lip-synching is never appropriate in live performance except under extraordinary circumstances like those at Pittsburgh Opera on April 1 (this is no April Fool's joke) when the tenor singing Radames could not complete the opera. His understudy (called a "cover" in opera) was in New York City - covers often are not located in the same city as the company for reasons of economy and supply - and could not get to Pittsburgh in time. With one act to go, management announced that conductor Antony Walker, himself an accomplished vocalist, would sing the role from the pit while he conducted the last act (he was miked because he had his back to the audience). The ill tenor acted the role on stage and lip-synched the part. The opera ended successfully and to much acclaim, both to the company and Maestro Walker. What made lip-synching acceptable in this instance is that it was not planned and was employed only in an emergency after other options had been considered and rejected, and that management announced that it would occur. I was in the chorus of that production and was proud to be a part of opera history and to count Maestro Walker as a colleague and friend. While it is not uncommon in similar circumstances for singers to lip-synch as other sing from the side of the stage, it is not common for the conductor to sing - it may have been an opera first.
To Sidney - no newcomer could ever replace Pavarotti. That was the opening of Olympics in ITALY. Could they let some newcomer sing or better let their own Pavarotti, an Italian legend, do it? What's the difference? Even lyp-synching this performance he didn't became in one level with Britney or Simpson. Maybe some of you didn't get the whole story, that he was ill at the time and anyway - does it matter that he sing his pre-recorded version two weeks before or do it live? He didn't fake it. He has done every concert in his life live, for gigantic audiences. He did not need to show he could sing.
Who cares he faked it... we all know that he is a legend, one of the best tenors in this century which was not made by faking. You should be thanking him that he at least still wanted to perform for the public while his health was down.. He just wanted to give something positive to people. You must be really foolish if you cant see that.
And I think Italy is grateful for his performance that night. After all - who else could have Ferarri and Pavarotti on one stage?
No way did Pavarotti lip synced this.If you study the video,its impossible to see any lip syncing.Its too perfect.The ambience is too live.Besides lets give Pavarotti his due,he was sick.it was below freezing.I know how hard it is to sing in the cold.And he still brought us to tears.
This thread is closed.
Back to Episode