|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
72.133.34.30
Did anyone else happen to see Madonna on the Tonight Show last night? You call that dancing? She was humping everything in the studio including several members of the audience. I would have sprayed her with the garden hose. lol
I've officially turned into my parents. My dad would have done the same to my "hippie" boyfriends.
Follow Ups:
But she was a 1-decade play.
Are there better? Sure.
Are there always better than who happens to be famous? Yes.
I'm thinking that she might not be so very bad, guys.
============================
As audiophiles, we take what's obsolete, make it beautiful, and keep it forever.
Hey! I have a blog now: http://mancave-stereo.blogspot.com or "like" us at https://www.facebook.com/mancave.stereo
she has enough of it to get a bunch of old fooks at AA worked up.
Still.
"Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination" -Michael McClure
and I completely agree. My problem with her is that her talents are
absolutely minimal, but she has made gadzillions of dollars appealing to
an audience which has seemingly zero appreciation for real talent but
is captivated by hype.
If she was minimally talented she would not have lasted this long.
"appealing to an audience which has seemingly zero appreciation for real talent."
So one can't appreciate different kinds of music? Not everyone can do what Madonna or Lady Gaga do - it's not just about a singing voice with pop music. There are better singers but pop requires a "complete package" of skills to be successful.
Music has different target audiences and goals - pop is dance music - 95%+ of jazz would largely be completely out of place for that sort of thing.
I've been thinking about this topic a bit lately because I appreciate Classical, Jazz, Folk, Instrumental, R&B, Soul, Contemporary, Country, Rock, Metal, Opera, Pop, Hip Hop, Trance, House, etc.
I find people will rave say about the Beatles and then rip Lady Gaga or Madonna. So I begin to think - well why is that?
As a lit major I look at the lyrics and I don't see vast differences in the quality of the poetry between rock and pop music - there are painfully simple hugely popular songs from both camps. Pop and rock tend to be "poetry set to music."
I mean most of the Beatles catalog isn't exactly a source of great or profound lyrics and neither are most rock bands. I mean here is an example of the Beatles
"Last night I said these words to my girl
I know you never even try, girl
Come on
(Come on)
Come on
(Come on)
Come on
(Come on)
Come on
(Come on)
Please, please me, whoa yeah
Like I please you
You don't need me to show the way, love
Why do I always have to say, love?
Come on
(Come on)
Come on
(Come on)
Come on
(Come on)
Come on
(Come on)
Please, please me, whoa yeah
Like I please you
I don't want to sound complaining
But you know there's always rain in my heart
(In my heart)...
It's not like the band members here are profoundly talented musicians either - most consider Ringo to be a mediocre drummer. So we're not talking A-grade philharmonic quality instrument players nor were their songs particularly great pieces of poetry.
Yet this is viewed as great music but Madonna or Lady Gaga are not. I might give you Madonna because she doesn't play instruments but I look at the above song compared to this pop song from Lady Gaga
We are the crowd
We're c-coming out
Got my flash on it's true
Need that picture of you
It's so magical
We'd be so fantastical
Leather and jeans
We're rock glamorous
Not sure what it means
But this photo of us
It don't have a price
Ready for those flashing lights
Cause you know that baby I
[Chorus]
I'm your biggest fan
I'll follow you until you love me
Papa-paparazzi
Baby there's no other superstar
You know that I'll be
Your papa-paparazzi
Promise I'll be kind
But I won't stop until that boy is mine
Baby you'll be famous
Chase you down until you love me
Papa-paparazzi
I'll be a girl backstage at your show
Velvet ropes and guitars
Yeah 'cause you're my
Rockstar in between the sets
Eyeliner and cigarettes
Shadow is burnt
Yellow dance and we turn
My lashes are dry
Purple teardrops I cry it don't have a price
Loving you is cherry pie
'Cause you know that baby I
This lyrically is more sophisticated from a poetry perspective.
And she plays the piano an instrument more difficult and sophisticated than most of what the Beatles and most rock bands happen to play (guitar, bass, and percussion). So she wins on level of difficulty of instrument. She sings at least as well as most or any rock singer - Axl Rose was heralded as the best male rock vocalist... Hint - if you need liner notes to understand what the heck anyone is singing - they kind of suck. It's a thing called Enunciation!
Classical and Jazz are far more sophisticated than either pop or rock but it always seems to me to be the rock guys scoffing at pop music and that's a head scratcher to me. It's not like Rock isn't repetitive or uses particular difficult instrumentation. Although must say I am far more impressed by bands with good individual intrumentalists who play well like a Slash or Buckethead or Santana etc. I suppose this is one of the main areas where rock exceeds pop but it isn't vocal talent and it's not really the poetry. Although you can just buy a Buckethead or Santana CD without vocals and it's probably a better album than listening to some two bit hack scream into a microphone interrupting the nice guitar solo.
probably never will.
The lyrics though remind me of Bowie around his heavy Glam period and THAT certainly is... cool!
"Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination" -Michael McClure
That IMO can change minds on her level of talent - if this can't do it then nothing will so
Her name comes from a Queen song - she's a huge Queen fan. Specifically from the song "Radio Ga Ga."
Paparazzi is a funky video IMO. It was the first thing I saw from her.
"she has enough of it to get a bunch of old fooks at AA worked up."
Kind of like Bose speakers........
Madonna is a total sell out
Seems she is trying to keep up with the young'uns of the pop industry. At least there didn't seem to be any Illuminati homages. She needs to settle down to Streisand or Kate Smith.
"Seems she is trying to keep up with the young'uns of the pop industry. At least there didn't seem to be any Illuminati homages. She needs to settle down to Streisand or Kate Smith."
The likes of Madonna and Lady Gaga need the histrionics in order to impress the audience and sell product..... And in most part, they have succeeded..... But I don't think either artist is capable of making people appreciate the music as music, if the act were to be taken away. (Although Madonna at least sings in concerts. Gaga OTOH is mostly playback.)
It's kind of like professional wrestling.... Including the few militant fans out there who try to convince us that it's real (music/sports).
Have to disagree with you on Lady Gaga. Checkout some of her recent works and wonderful voice.
Pretty hard not to be convinced that she is a quality singer (auto-tune BS arguments or not)
Edits: 04/13/15 04/13/15
If nothing else, Lady Gaga is actually an attractive woman when she presents herself in a tasteful way.... The voice? Who knows, a low quality video from the network media, I'd hope it was her voice..... I'm just disappointed that nobody could come up with a decent quality video from a 2015 show.
I guess people think it's mindblowing because they're starving for something mindblowing.......... Not realizing there is far better stuff out there if they simply circumvented the American network media.
The Oscars apparently keep directing youtube to take the performance down.
I guess the only way to be convinced is to hear her live without a micrphone standing directly in front of her. No matter what is produced on any medium you will be convinced is a complete fraud. So my suggestion is to just keep the tin foil hat on and go about your business.
"The Oscars apparently keep directing youtube to take the performance down."
It's a travesty.... What's actually being protected?
If people enjoy it, they should have access to it. I don't care who the performer is.
Material being taken down on YouTube due to copyright grounds doesn't really accomplish anything..... It has been a long time pet peeve of mine..... If a performance won't ever be marketed, why deny people the opportunity to enjoy it?
They retain rights to it so they can sell it LATER on the 'greatest hits' reel.
Too much is never enough
Gaga managed to remove the act and sell very well with a jazz release (Gold in the US).The "antics" increase youtube hits because the "antics" are video based. Shelling out the money on the other hand requires that you listen and only listen to the music content. PSY had the most number of youtube hits for example with Gangnam Style but he didn't sell the most number of actual singles that year. People will watch the geek show but to get people to part with their money - requires some songs that people want to actually LISTEN to.
And I know that bugs the hell out of self proclaimed froo froo posters on this board but Madonna and Gaga outsell most artists because in fact they're much better than most of their competition. Granted their competition isn't exactly great - this is pop music after all.
Gaga easily has the better voice - that doesn't mean she's necessarily the better talent because pop is far more about the overall production but it's pretty obvious.
I think you should sue Lady Gaga for libel because she has publicly stated that Cheek to Cheek has no auto-tune - If you can actually PROVE your assertion - you have a singer with very deep pockets to make some money on. Can you - you know prove it?
She states it here - so download it and you can take her to court.
Lady Gaga Interview 9.24.14
Edits: 04/12/15 04/12/15
There were people who've demanded me "prove" WWE wrestling is fake..... My response is asking them why WWE results are never reported in sports news services. They claim that isn't proof, just speculation.How does one prove the most-blatant user of Auto-Tune uses it? I might hear a recording of what I think is obviously an oboe. How would I prove it's an oboe? I could even have someone play an oboe with the recording, and another listener can still claim the recording is of a different instrument.
Demanding proof of a recognized sound is one way to conveniently "disqualify" a finding, but that does not prove the contrary either. If you want to believe Lady Gaga doesn't use Auto-Tune, that's fine. (The biggest problem I have is people refusing to learn how to recognize Auto-Tune. Yet want to argue militantly that it isn't there. It's no different from the "sounds the same" crowd refusing to train their hearing.) But if a gun were placed to my head, where it would go off if I guessed wrong (presuming the trigger man was omniscient), I'd be a lot more stressed out if I said Gaga didn't use Auto-Tune than if I said she did use it.
I don't like it whenever my favorite performers use Auto-Tune (most notably Aleks Syntek).... But I will never claim it isn't there if I notice it.
Edits: 04/12/15
Your examples are preposterous. WWE wrestlers are real - they exist you can see them jumping around on stage and they are physically doing wrestling moves. Is it real wrestling as to not knowing the outcome at the end - well no. The fact that anyone believed that it was otherwise is the problem.As for the OBOE - yes you can prove it is in an oboe - go get 20 oboe players to listen to the track and confirm that it is in fact an oboe and not a clarinet.
I think it would be easy - get an EE to go over the Cheek to Cheek album and check every note through a computer and find variation. Her pop albums use it - she says so - you can hear it - it is fairly obvious. She claims the Jazz album claims she doesn't and Mr. Bennett and the recording team says they didn't. Since 99.99% of the music buying public doesn't care (since they bought her auto-tuned FAME album in ridiculously high numbers) there isn't much reason to lie about it. It's not like it will have the slightest impact on sales. Indeed, for Bennett's sake on several cuts it probably NEEDS autotune because well he's not "in-tune" - if auto-tune fixes being in tune then that kind of screams volume that it's not being used on the album - or can you not tell when a singer is off pitch and out of tune? I can and he is.
Illustrate the minute and second mark of the song and explain specifically which note and when there is "obvious" use of autotune. It really is that simple - if you make a claim that it is there then the onus is on you to prove the claim. It is all over Madonna's latest album and it is obvious.
You seem to be the only poster on any forum anywhere that continuously brings up autotune basically hearing it on every album.
It is frankly absurd if you don't think Gaga has a voice - I get not liking her how she rose to fame - her stances on LGBT blah blah but to suggest she can't sing or is only decent via auto-tune is idiotic. Patently idiotic.
Edits: 04/12/15 04/12/15 04/12/15
I've never heard Lady Gaga sing without Auto-Tune..... So I can't comment on her actual voice. (There are old bar clips where it's switched on and off during performance, she sounded awful without it, but I think she intended to sound awful during those moments.)
But unlike some of her producers and fans, at least the performer herself admits her real voice was never actually heard...... (The Tony Bennett duets have less Auto-Tune, but not devoid of it.)
She says that Cheek to Cheek uses absolutely no auto-tune that all of it was recorded live with numerous takes. In the link I provided the interviewer point blank says "less processing" and she jumped in and point blank said absolutely none. Listen to the radio interview linked about halfway through.
That is why I say - if someone who can factually prove that there is auto-tune on the album can file a class action lawsuit claiming that she is committing a fraud on the album buying public. This is America after all where lawyers are looking for work around every corner and with a BIG album sales behind her surely a lawyer with decent skill could get a few million out of her - just having any evidence might get you a few hundred grand in a settlement.
Better Call Saul.
The problem with all of this is that with the program in existence the assumption will be that every recording from anyone that you happen not to like will be deemed to be using auto-tune.
I don't particularly trust people who say "well I can hear it so it's there" - plenty of people claim they heard God tell them to kill a bunch of people and I don't take them at their word.
And that is the case with auto-tune - Cher's "Believe" is a hefty use of auto-tune because the voice sounds like an out and out robot. If auto-tune is taking an otherwise excellent vocal and "ever so slightly" rounding a note and only a few times then to me that's a non starter. Cheek to Cheek is pretty pitchy at times from both singers - if auto-tune was being used then those pitch problems simply would not be there - it would have been "photoshopped" out. It makes absolutely no sense to use autotune and then produce an album that is off pitch (out of tune).
This goes for live performance - if she was lipsyncing then gee her live performance would sound EXACTLY like the CD version which in EVERY case that I have heard has not been the case. She sings the same song about a dozen times in a dozen locations and each time they sound very different from each other and very different from the CD. So what on earth is she lip syncing too? She is often off pitch in all the live performances I've seen - if auto-tune was in use then she would never be off pitch. One can simply do a youtube search of about 8 versions of Speechless - it is VERY obvious that she is out of tune at times and she's off pitch - what should also be clear is that she has a good voice
In live performances of her dance songs there is clear processing being used and also very clear use of a backing track which virtually all pop music acts use. I should think it impossible to be dancing around a stage while singing and also being pitch perfect.
You do a great job describing the Emperor's New Clothes..... The problem is I still see a naked man...............
Your ears will follow.
While I DIDN'T see the appearance, I have seen clips. IMO an aged, pop singer from the 80's who is one of the early " visual shock" entertainers. Awful on every level. Any woman entertainer that age just looks silly doing those sort of antics. But of course her fans will say she was fabulous.
I cringe reading some of the comments here. Someone defends her aged presence with Jagger...huh? She is now a reference for whats considered "great music" for the masses.
Funny how any performer from that era is now seen as a matured, pioneer of
genius for whatever they did. Her audience was teenaged kids who are now in their 40's.
It's part of their past and now it's a gauge for whats hot/hip now.
I will just hold on to my pre 80's memories and grit my teeth.
Her music was listenable, mindless FM radio garbage...in 85.
Nice, compact rhythm lines. IMHO, at least.
8^)
-----
/
Nt
.
Her first LP effort showed promise of a brilliant career (especially compared to some of the so-called punk music which was subpar), but Like A Virgin was like a crap. I couldn't wait to get it out of my system, then I cleaned up the mess and got back to the program already in progress.
http://mindseyemusic.blogspot.com/
Edits: 04/11/15
I see nothing wrong with it - it is what she has done at shows since 1982 - see Like a Virgin.
And she has lasted for 30+ years doing what she does for good reason - she's entertaining and puts on a show - which is what we want from Pop Stars.
I grow weary of the dump on Madonna crowd - she has put out a wealth of lasting catchy pop tunes that to this day get plenty of airplay and club play. Heck I teach at a Catholic school in China and the 13 year olds requested Like A Prayer. That was a smartly written song, it was a good video, she sings it well - it's an excellent song from a pretty darn good album. I was okay up to Ray of Light where she kind of fell off the rails although there were a couple of decent songs after that
And interestingly, while she took flack at the time for many of her songs looking back at them now - they come across as positively conservative.
And just because she's 56 doesn't mean life or her sexuality has to end and perhaps that is what will keep her near the top because European countries tend not to be so sexually repressed and if Madonna brings that idea to the West that you can strut your stuff at 60 then good for her. Tina Turner I saw in concert when she was pushing 60 and damn those legs!! I was in awe of Madonna when I was 11 years old and she still looks good to me, she still gets the house into it.
Still probably my favorite song/Video from Madonna is Like A Prayer along with Live to Tell. Both more vocally centered songs too. I think her voice is good - it's distinctive - you know immediately it's Madonna and she covers what she needs to cover. I would argue that you don't last as long nor sell as well while lasting as long without talent. Madonna is the complete POP package and she's still still "THE" pop queen.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDnUIXF2ly8
BTW, I am not a fan, just have no problem/issue with her and admire her ability to stay relevant for so long.
Dean.
reelsmith's axiom: Its going to be used equipment when I sell it, so it may as well be used equipment when I buy it.
"BTW, I am not a fan, just have no problem/issue with her and admire her ability to stay relevant for so long."
As far as I'm concerned, "relevance" in today's entertainment is the "acceptance" by our media and pop culture. The problem is what is accepted by our media and pop culture has nothing to do with the quality of the product. Too often, shock effect, political correctness, and even the level of vulgarity is what the media accepts as "relevant".
If nothing else, she is smart and knows how to stay in the public eye.
Dean.
reelsmith's axiom: Its going to be used equipment when I sell it, so it may as well be used equipment when I buy it.
Looks like she is having fun!
... I think she is great.
Maybe all the snoots bagging Madonna can post pictures of their own beauty circa 56?
Whilst at it you can also list your venerable achievements.
Green doesn't suit some folks.
d:o)
Smile
Sox
Indeed, and it would seem that Madonna is able to sell without her looks after all. Perhaps there is more talent there than some care to admit.
terrible thing to waste...
... you've turned into your kids.
Those old broads just can't give it up !
Best I can say about Madonna is she's one helluva businesswoman. Wouldn't want her humping me.
I happen to know personally Madge's Makeup lady --Joanne Gair--Google if you want--
whether she is still, not certain, I have read Ms M is canny with the $$'s
Jo is doing pretty well in her own right anyway
Doubts re the Fortune Though
Des
...the wife and I have discovered how gorgeous we both are with the lights out. ;-)
Aging is a bitch, and it's the boss once it sets in.
See ya. Dave
plastic surgeries start looking like each other? Like being Zombie-fied.
Worse than looking at the south end of a cow, walking north.
Yep, you got it.
I enjoyed her. You guys say nothing when Mick Jagger and the stones who look like they all died 20 years ago go on tour and act like there 20 years old. Madonna has sold over 300 million records and has more money then all of us put together
Alan
when they were in Melbourne, last December. It was the very last concert before he got his throat infection and had to cancel his remaining Oz performances.
He is amazing - he absolutely does have the energy of a 20-year old! :-))
Andy
It's not the age, it's the performance. Puts Madonna to shame.
Put her to shame that is.
nt
that hope was even found...
"Madonna: All hope is lost".
Sounds like a great album title.
About 15 years ago, I saw her playing craps at (I think) Bally's in Vegas. From her appearance, I thought she was a hooker, until I heard a couple guys call her "Donny", then I recognized her.
I thought The Tonight Show ended when Johnny Carson left and the band went on tour. Have they still got that show on life support?
:)
...Jimmy Fallon has revitalized it for the younger generation.
I can't agree. I think he's terrible. Lousy interviewer, fawns over guests, asks cream-puff questions. Acts childish playing silly physical games with guests. Jack Paar he ain't. Johnny Carson he ain't. Dumbed down for a non-discriminating audience that doesn't know any better.
"Dumbned down for a non-discriminating audience that doesn't know any better."
It's simply the new order(45 and younger)slowly changing the landscape of what's considered normal,acceptable,talent...etc. My post mentions the atrocity.
Both Jimmys are part of THEM! The other one is equally dull. Reality is now
skewed more than ever. I saw this coming as a teen in the 70's! Music/entertainment slowly turning into processed cheese and no stopping it.
I'm just gonna play my records... I mean VINYLS(gag)
I'm a Carson/Tonight Show loyalist. I tuned in the 1st week Leno took over and than never watched again, really thought the show deteriorated while he was there. I like Fallon, not Kimmel. As far as Fallons antics, 'games', etc.. I own a 5 DVD set of Carson and while he may not have engaged in 'games' too much, he absolutely loved doing skits and bits! P.S. - There's been some great house bands on the late night shows but NONE was better than the Tonight Show Orchestra feat. Doc Severinson!
...ask your kids what they think of him.
He's post-Jay Leno.
and well recorded. That cut is not part of it. :)
IMO it was the best of those typically awful spectacles.
I of course missed it but wanted to see. Not much, I didn't realize she had a gap tooth thing wider than Letterman. The music was typical lame. Started off as a lip sync or something as she had no mic. Then when she had a mic it was live (Fallon talked into it)but the vocal track sounded pretty much the same.
So after the song video at the link there is a another video that will autoplay that shows her on the couch w/Fallon who then reintroduces her for a stand up comedy thing. Be advised it is a waste of time pretty much to watch either video.
E
T
nt
> My dad would have done the same to my "hippie" boyfriends.>
Sue, it sounds like you're feeling a "generation gap" only she's our generation.
I think it was the Grammy's where she performed with these guys with horns on their heads carrying her around - my thought was, who's mugging that old lady?
that's on past my bedtime.
"Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination" -Michael McClure
Bedtime Stories?
She kept nudging me awake to see Madonna. After the fact, when it was all done and hormonal excrement from our TV cleared, we both wondered why we'd even bothered...
Cheers,
Dman
Analog Junkie
Yes, I saw her last night. Kinda neat doing the stand up bit (there were a few self-depreciating one-liners in there that I got a chuckle at), but I have to agree- I think she should be spayed AND neutered...
I lost hope in her dancing/live performing when she did her "confessions" tour (and subsequent DVD). Musically, I can't get past "Bitch, I'm Madonna". By comparison, most of her previous album (Hard Candy?) sounds like an album of ballads (musically AND lyrically). I can't get into Rebel Heart at all...
I was content to satisfy my curiosity seeing her talk with Fallon. After that, D-wife somehow kept me awake until the performance was over. At which point even she (probably a bigger M-fan that me) was asking me, "why did we bother?"
As with art, pop-music, and politics; YMMV...
Dman
Analog Junkie
She's old and not aging gracefully. I did enjoy her music and followed her up to "Ray of Light", which is outstanding.
It sounds like "Rebel Heart" is really stretching...
I still wish I'd gotten "Bedtime Stories" on LP when it came out (did it come out on vinyl???).
Cheers,
Dman
Analog Junkie
Ray has great stuff ALife is like they forgot to employ the limiter--ha!
Des
"hope" related to her or most any pop star for that matter? Especially with Madonna we have a long established back story related to her in many areas we can draw on and nobody should ever be surprised at any of her "actions".
E
T
I felt embarrassed for her attempted comedy routine.
She's an average singer.
She's not a better dancer than any Las Vegas showgirl.
She can't act.
She can't play a musical instrument or compose.
She's not funny.
My... she's gone a long way on those boobs, hasn't she?
"Familiarity breeds contempt, and children."
-Mark Twain
that and lots of other things we don't know about.
E
T
She can't sing, her "dancing" and "acting" are marginal at best, I've never
understood the attraction. Of course, back in my day, there were also
plenty of well known acts who were also quite talent-less too ...
Put it like this.....you see an ad for used albums listing lots of vinyl....Madonna and others.....or Dianna Krall and others...which one would you be interested in? Nuff said!
McDonalds has sold over a billion hamburgers. That doesn't mean they're any good.
Edits: 04/12/15
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: