Britney Spears hit Australia for the first time this week and so far the reception has been less than desirable for Britney, with fans (allegedly) walking out of her Perth concert after just three songs.
Spears' representatives have hit back saying that the media claims are unsubstantiated, and that there has been a lot of positive feedback for the first concert.
One representative said that, according to the negative media, some fans were upset that Spears "was miming during segments of the two-hour show". The representative did not deny that Spears was miming, but rather alluded to the idea that it was an occasional occurance.
While there are few people who believe that miming should be expected at a live performance, and argue that consumers pay to see the "spectacle" rather than to hear a singer sing, many people are arguing that "live means live". Others are saying that Britney cannot sing, and thus she must pre-record her shows with the sufficient editing.
In opposition to claims that Britney cannot sing, there are many public videos available where a young Spears can be heard singing live, and there is no doubt about her talent.
An interviewer once asked Britney if she liked her voice and she responded with "It's not that I like my voice, I just like how I feel when I sing. I would really like to have a voice like Christina Aguilera". If you listen to the small segment of a young Britney in the following clip singing "Love Can Build A Bridge", you will see she already has (or had) a voice that could match the likes of Christina Aguilera.
I am in agreement that singers should be singing 100 per cent live when performing live concerts. When I pay to see a "singer", I would rather them stand completely still on stage and sing to me; let me hear that beautiful voice that supposedly got them to where they are. High energy dancing and acrobats are not what I paid for, if I wanted that I would go to a circus (excuse the pun - totally not intended).
So if Britney Spears has this amazing voice, and it is undeniable that if we saw a young child singing like that we would get shivers down our spine, why is she miming in her live performances? Has her voice changed, like some people believe?
Maybe her voice has changed, who can know for sure? I believe that the massive amounts of digital editing in music clips these days has made it utterly impossible for even the most talented singers to reproduce their own hits live. Who can sing like a computer?
I came to this conclusion after hearing Fergie, from the Black Eyed Peas, singing "Meet Me Halfway" live. I absolutely love this song, and Fergie's voice sounds amazing. But, when I heard it live I was very disappointed.
I listened, and I listened carefully. She would sing the lyrics, and they sounded very bland and very flat in comparison to the sound on the recorded track. Then Fergie let her voice rip into one of those ferocious howls that many artists do when they are performing live. I thought about it and wondered why artists do this? Then it hit me!
Fergie CAN sing! Britney CAN sing! They can ALL sing! The latest trend in computerised music is resulting in artists not being able to fulfill their vocal abilities when performing live because they are trying so hard to reproduce an exact replica of a computerised song! This means their frequent "howling" is actually them trying to exercise their true talent in a performance that is otherwise controlled and limited, and also quite often impossible to achieve! It is like their talent is a lion trapped in a cage; only allowed out when the crowd wants them to!
So while some may argue that the quality of talent has gone downhill in modern times, I want to argue that that is not the case. I believe that the music industry's unrelenting desire for success has superseded the artist's desire to share their true talent, and subsequently oppressed that talent by shrouding it in digitised crap!
Is there any turning back now? Can we reverse the damage that computerised music has done to live performances?
