Title: This is how they did it before auto-tune,lip-syncing,and backup dancders Source:
[None] URL Source:[None] Published:Jan 8, 2016 Author:sneakypete Post Date:2016-01-08 15:31:11 by sneakypete Ping List:*Music*Subscribe to *Music* Keywords:None Views:1677 Comments:12
Poster Comment:
Boys and girls,this is how music was done back before the world of auto-tune,lip-syncing,and backup dancers to distract people from noticing how much the "star" sucks. Geezers like me remember (mostly vaguely) performances like this 40 + years ago being what people expected to see when they bought a concert ticket. I know this will be a revelation to those of you under 40,but it's the truth.
Boys and girls,this is how music was done back before the world of auto-tune,lip-syncing,and backup dancers to distract people from noticing how much the "star" sucks.
Maybe. They had plenty of groups with lots of props and costume changes back then. The group Boston toured with that huge UFO thingy. Some acts, especially the female pop stars would tour with 20 dancers of more and had a dozen or more quick-change costume changes on stage that took only a few seconds.
I think you are being a little selective in remembering those "good ol' days". There were plenty of dancers and costumes and stage props in concerts and on TV back then, just like now.
A lot of groups operated at about the level of Spinal Tap.
Maybe. They had plenty of groups with lots of props and costume changes back then.
None that I paid any attention to. Not that costumes or trendy clothing had anything to do with the music. Bob Seeger did have a couple of chicks dancing in the background,but they were playing saxophones.
You are leaving a lot out. Like Ray Charles who toured with small orchestras and a large number of backup singers. No doubt, a major musical talent and star. He was far from the only act like that.
You are leaving a lot out. Like Ray Charles who toured with small orchestras and a large number of backup singers.
HorseHillary! THEY WERE MUSICIANS,not backup dancers. Their purpose there was to add depth to the sound,not distractions.
And Ray Charles generally toured with just a few female backup singers,and singers is what they were,not dancers.
I personally thought that Ray Charles was being over produced in the early 70's. Yeah,the orchestra and massive speakers added an enormous amount of "depth" to his recordings and shows,but all Ray Charles ever really needed was a piano,3 or 4 chick backup singers,and a microphone. IMHO,all that overproduction really did was take away from the natural sound quality that WAS Ray Charles.
ELO WAS a touring orchestra,and that was excellent for the style of rock they were playing,but they weren't playing the raw R&B sound Ray Charles was born to play and sing.
And once again,ELO didn't have backup dancers,whatever the HELL a backup dancer really is. All they had on stage were professional musicians.
I guess the closest "real" music came to having backup dancers was The Grateful Dead,where random audience members,mostly female,that were high would climb up on stage and dance around.
And EVERYBODY danced when Little Feat were playing.
HorseHillary! THEY WERE MUSICIANS,not backup dancers.
I begin to think you don't care for backup dancers. : )
I don't hate the dancers,who I hate are the untalented pseudo-musicians that trot them out on stage to distract the ignorant teeny boppers and others who confuse spectacle with talent into thinking they are talented.
Here is an example of what a anti-spectacle musician with actual talent can do with nothing more than raw talent and a 3 string junk guitar.
Seasick Steve doesn't need backup dancers. People in the audience dance for him.
