Gene Simmons On Lip-Syncing

LoL. To compare Madonna or Michael Jackson's success to Justin Bieber or Miley is ugh just wrong. You cant discredit the art of choreography and a certain genre of music simply because u dont like it. Its quite evident in your remarks.

I think when you insult choreography that is present in a show like that of Madonna or MJ, your then insulting the art of dance. When you see Madonna you are seeing a ballet. Her shows are amazing. She has some of the most talented dancers in the industry walk across her stage. Its like walking a Cirque de Soleil show. There is so much going on but it all blends cohesively.

Sure you may not like her music but don't insult the "intelligence" of those of us who listen to her. I could easily say that the quality of rock music and anything that isnt Mariah or Celine is crap, but everyone has their own taste, which I respect.

Your bias is showing.

Their similarities are stark and evident. Only time will tell if Beiber/Miley/etc. will be permitted to last as long as Madonna or Michael Jackson. It's unlikely however considering that, both Madonna and Michael Jackson, sold not only their music but a persona and icon. It's an incredibly complex social phenomena, but you'd be naive to doubt that big business wasn't pulling the strings every step of the way.

I give them the credit I think they deserve, as "artists," but I stand by my assertion; choreography is filler.

I agree on Madonna, but Michael Jackson's actually on a different level, he was indeed a great dancer who invented his own style. My friend that does hiphop dancing never stops praising how awesome he was at that stuff.

Not disagreeing on anything else anyway.

Here, ladies and gents, is an example of someone "stretching it".

no comment <rolls eyes>

Their similarities are evident to you. I feel your stepping upon this scaffold of elitism.

You call people who listen to a genre of music "affected the general intelligence level of several generations of America." I'd like some references please. If your unable to substantiate a statement like that, its fallible.

"It's an incredibly complex social phenomena" really? says who? you?

That's an opinion which your entitled to the rest is unsubstantiated facts and elitism.

Not all her tours were of that caliber. I'll agree. I think the shows became more artistic with the release of Ray of Light. "Stretching it" encompasses fabrication of fact not opinion.

Oh. Forgive me. How many years of jazz, tap, ballet, drill team, and lyrical have you taken?

EDIT: What I would really like to know is could you name a ballet other than 'Swan Lake' without Googling, but there's no way that I can confirm that you didn't use the old search.

21 years this November, If you include others styles of dance... I love to dance. And considering my parents made me start taking Folklorico classes at 7(latin-american dance) I do know a thing or two regarding the art of dance. From there I've taken Bachata, Salsa, Merengue and Hip Hop.

I think all dance is beautiful and requires control. You can't just limit it to ballet. Hip hop is amazing. My point in my argument is her dancers are extremely talented. Just because its hop hop or interpretive-dance doesnt make it lower-par.

Folklorico...Thanks for the explanation, but obviously there was not one needed. What exactly gave you any indication that I was only in ballet when I listed four other styles of dance?

Yeah...You would be better off referring to it as hip hop than a ballet. Don't insult people who are classically trained. Just saying...

And I feel I'm having a calm discussion with a frothing fan-boy. If you actually read what I've written, and avoid projecting whatever defensiveness, you'll see that the only thing I've done is compare Madonna/Michael Jackson to the current youthful upstarts of today's generation, at your behest. I didn't bring them up, nor have I given an opinion on either of them – and you can count on that having been my intent.

As far as the reference to business feeding us ***, well that was a sweeping statement and not even confined to the music genre, and I really don't feel like writing a dissertation in order to dissuade you of whatever you're being defensive about. It wasn't meant for just fans of pop, especially since not all fans of pop artists are wholly attached to the pop industry. Watch Dilbert if you want, that's about as concise as I can make it while staying true to my statement.

It wasnt directed at you, but rather I dont think the general FFXIAH population would know what Folklorico is lol thats why i explained.

I don't think I'm insulting hip-hop I think I'm complimenting it. Ballet is a passe style of dance. Its like saying I can make dresses from victoria era style, "im a good dress-maker." Its not current It doesnt cut it. Just like fashion it needs to up-date itself with the times.

@Tikal "affected the general intelligence level of several generations of America." I'm still waiting on references...

delete post

Not to digress from the wonderful argument going on, but...

I think I'll fall into the lump of other people who are saying "I pay for a concert to see them perform live."

Just because you sing live doesn't mean you can't put on a good show. I went to go see Coldplay when I was younger and the show was pretty epic plus they actually preform live. I got my wife and I tickets for the Mylo Xyloto tour for our anniversary and I just can't wait until they hit Dallas. Friday show, center stage 4th row ( '-')b going to be awesome.

Edit: Should probably expand on this a bit. Coldplay sounds much better on the album. Chris Martin's vocals aren't anything to write home about (either live or in studio for that matter), but the show itself made you overlook that fact. The show itself was a total blast and immersive, enough so that I am excited to get to go again. And that should be the point of a live show.

Tool is another great band to see live. Too bad I missed the concert earlier this year in Dallas (<.<; blew all my money on Coldplay tickets).

Moral of the story; you don't have to lip sync to put on a good show live.

Simply put, you're not worth the time. Every single post you've made has misconstrued some information or all of it presented, and it's been pretty uninteresting. If you want to end this at "lol lol," then that's fine by me.

...what?

So by extrapolation, any piece of classical music, despite it's musical merit, complexity and beauty, is no longer relevant and is outdated?

I'm not worth the time or you can't provide proper citations for your claims. You can't mount yourself atop this scaffold of all-righteousness and not except some scrutiny. I find that naive.

It's outdated? Depends who you ask. But if you pulled 10 random people out on the street- they'd prolly say yes.

Is it relavant? Yes...I think. I never took Music theory so i cant speak on that.

Understood. NP.

Just wondering, but how many company competitions have you gone to where eight to thirteen-year-olds were doing hip-hop routines in unnecessarily short hot-pants. I taught and choreographed dance while in high school (my first job) from pre-k combo to second year point. There is something very unsettling with some ages taking part in hip-hop. You can say that ballet is "passe", but you if you don't know the fundamentals of dance, then how are you a good dancer? Something as elementary as positions come from ballet.

EDIT: We need Leila in on this!

I think Rammstein is a great example of being able to put on hell of a show but not requiring samples or lip syncing. Granted, pyrotechnics aren't conducive to interpretive dance or whatever.

Pretty positive I know what got Cuelebra riled up. It was the dry-humping comment. Yeah, I still stick to that one too.

OH yes I 100% agree. I think because hip-hop is like latin-dance in the sense that its very sexual- it can look disturbing. I wouldn't let my sister do proper Merengue at 4yo. It would just look wrong. I meant passe in terms of its popularity. It is a fundamental of dance. I took it. Did I need to for control of my limbs no. I took bikhram yoga for years prior, which helped me with that.

Just like dress making. If you dont know the fundamentals you cant design. Or same with hair/makeup or any artistry I think. Nevertheless, if you intend on being sucessfull, you need to keep up-to-date.

Some people are ignorant too. If you can't appreciate the fundamentals, you probably have no room to speak about music, dance, or art. Just my thoughts though.

I figure, an artist of any kind that performs live should give it their personal all, regardless of age or diminishing vocal qualities. Half of their job is knowing when to quit while they're ahead and cut their losses. Even Tom Araya of Slayer told interviewers he'd feel out of place playing the songs he and his band are famous for while they're in their 50s. To compromise your ability to perform your own works before a live audience in your own personal delivery is dishonest; to the point where you are no longer putting on a live performance, but rather a puppet show of sorts. For artists to acknowledge that and cleverly adhere to a general standard in performing arts is heart warming.

A good example was when Muse was to perform for an Italian talk show, but were forced to put on a false performance while their studio version was played in background, they cleverly switched places with each other to make fun of how stupid and ridiculous the whole thing was without bailing out completely. Notice the deliberate dropping of the drumstick and bobbing heads while dicking around and not actually putting forth any effort. What was even more hilarious was how clueless the host was when the lead singer/guitarist and bassist ran off while she was left interviewing the drummer, giving off a facade of being the leadman.

I'm getting slack for that random 10 people comment lol

My aim at that comment is that "art" derives from the artists interpretation of an idea and the observers interpretation of the art itself. (E.g. abstract or impressionist art) Jackson Pollock is a perfect example because of all the fuss over the "quality of art" regarding his paintings. The "random 10 people" = the majority of observers in this case aka general public.

Music performance is a sliding scale between passion and capitalism. Some artists are more focused on selling their product, or perhaps find that what their fanbase wants (potentially a result of selling said product depending on how far towards capitalism they're trending) is best delivered with prerecorded audio and greater focus on the visuals. While it's not the approach I favor, I can't really condemn them on those grounds alone either. Living your passion without compromise is a very lofty goal dictated in part by factors beyond one's own control.

Then I suppose it's rather disheartening that a target demograph or consumer base is more emphasized on visual eye candy than an artists' creative or talent capacities. This is more evident with the increasing trend of auto-tune, pre-rendered/recorded background music and a growing fixation on the person's appearance rather than their ability to deliver said works.

Face is still relevant. Classical music is everywhere, and not just in theory. The level of ignorance required to think classical music is at all passe is astounding. I can't see it becoming passe within my lifetime either; it grows and changes over time. The development of electronic music could dramatically change the face of music if its artists ever evolve beyond repetitious beats and spasmodic glitching, but I feel that there is even a place for classical music stylings to grow within that field. There are already composers and performers exploring that direction.

Aw, and I was doing so well with staying out of it, too.

I've been trained in ballet, jazz, modern, hip hop, and Middle Eastern (or what America commonly refers to as 'bellydance.') I've taken classes in some ballroom styles, but I did not spend enough time with them to consider myself decent at them.

It's been my experience that most, if not all, forms of dance need the others. If you want to be excellent at ballet, take Middle Eastern because it will strengthen your core and that makes your spins much crisper. If you want to be excellent at Modern, take Jazz because the two share a lot of moves. If you want to be more flexible, have cleaner lines, have a fuller range of motion, and better balance for any of the genres, take ballet.

I really could never say that one genre was more or less 'legit' than another. I needed them all when I danced. I don't think I could have been anything close to decent if I hadn't had the experience of all the styles I was trained in.

Does Madonna perform ballet? No, not really. But she does incorporate some basic ballet moves into her performances, such as the basic demi plie and grande plie, and she's probably taken some ballet classes, at the very least. Do her dancers perform ballet? No, not really, from what I've seen. But I would be truly shocked if any of them weren't trained in ballet. If you want to be a great dancer at any genre-- learn other genres!

Now that I've said all that, I'm a bit embarrassed that I've never even seen a Madonna concert, just her Superbowl halftime show. /blush.

I did see Video Games Live in concert in Seattle. Holy mother of awesome on a peanut butter cracker! You should all see them live if you ever get the chance. ^^

Music is more widely available than ever before. With that change comes a shift in who's listening to music. The sliding scale among artists is ultimately a product of the sliding scale in the listener base. Again, capitalism at work. My only complaint here is that I'm more often assaulted by music I don't care for as a result, but even then the capitalists fuel the industry to an extent so I do benefit in some ways.

In terms of Austrian/Venetian/Russian Classical music- It has become passe(strictly radio-plays).If it is evident in present day music that I cannot say(I dont have any background in Music Theory to actually make that argument)- but certainly not in the form of the original composer.

We arn't hearing Mozart or Chopin on KIIS FM or whatever the popular radio station is in ur area. Thats my point. Popularity dictates quality of art sadly. Look at literature, Thomas Hardy was scrutinized by public and critics. His art was not appreciated till long after his death.

I hope you meant quantity.