dlloyd Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 [quote name='kerley' timestamp='1330001001' post='1551091'] Guess you would have to track back to when miming to songs on TV became the norm. 1980s?, it certainly wasn't that recently anyway... [/quote] [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUfYvKEWOeE[/media] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveK Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 [quote name='kerley' timestamp='1330001001' post='1551091'] Guess you would have to track back to when miming to songs on TV became the norm. 1980s?, it certainly wasn't that recently anyway... [/quote]Bands and singers have mimed since the first days of TV. That wasn't really my point. It was more that it seems to quite common these days to hear 'At least they were playing live' as if this is the exception and for that fact alone the band should be applauded. I even occasionally find myself saying it... followed by a little sigh Since dlloyd posted the Hendrix clip, I'll say, there is quite a difference between doing a TV show such as TOTP and a 'live' event such as The Brits. We often see artists at these 'live' events miming, so I guess in that regard Blur should be applauded. In any case. Whether you dig them or not, scrappy or not, and even though they are now old farts, they're a rock'n'roll/pop band keeping the spirit of rock'n'roll alive. Good for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerley Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 [quote name='SteveK' timestamp='1330005511' post='1551260'] Bands and singers have mimed since the first days of TV. That wasn't really my point. It was more that it seems to quite common these days to hear 'At least they were playing live' as if this is the exception and for that fact alone the band should be applauded.[/quote] That has also been common for a long time. I remember that very point being made regularly in the 80s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_bass5 Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Seen better on the X factor first round shows. Terrible performance and they should really be ashamed of themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPTroll Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 It's fair to say that it was a dreadful performance, but then can anyone remember blur ever being that good live anyway? Albarn's voice was always dreadful live and although generally speaking they may have been tighter in the past, they were always more of a recording band than a live band. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thisnameistaken Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 [quote name='dave_bass5' timestamp='1330016474' post='1551518']Seen better on the X factor first round shows. Terrible performance and they should really be ashamed of themselves.[/quote] You should be ashamed for watching X Factor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_bass5 Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Yeah, I realised it was an admition of guilt as I pressed post. What I meant was I have "heard about" ;-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambo10 Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Now I'm not the biggest Blur fan in the world...take them or leave them really, a few decent tunes over the years....but I thought their performance was shambolic, absolutely terrible. there.....I've said my piece! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacqueslemac Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 We played Song 2 at a gig (black tie dinner) last night. Several people yelled out "better than the Brits" when we finished, so it's not just us who noticed how bad they were! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thisnameistaken Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 They should've given you the achievement award for learning the song from guitar tab and performing it competently. Why should they get all the acclaim just for writing and popularising songs? Give the cover bands their dues, that's what I say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarky Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 Not that it matters but my view is that Blur were very sloppy but energetic and I enjoyed it as a rock n roll performance. It was never chamber music and some people seem to have been expecting note-perfect clinical perfection. jeez you should have head my old punk band live, we made Blur look like Peter, Paul & Mary Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime_BASS Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 Been currently doing the rounds with song 2 as a cover. I hate doing it, we don't even play it right. However we too regularly hear it's better than blur. Then again, it's not hard. I like a few of the recordings they have done, but live always crap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judo Chop Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 [quote name='Mog' timestamp='1329915059' post='1549554'] Aye fine examples. But, its not like they were commonplace on the majority of the tunes and despite being well thought out basslines they really aint remarkable. Shes so high is a great example. Well structured etc. However, everytime I hear it I just think Stone Roses, ie. classic Brit Pop. [/quote] The Stone Roses weren't really Brit Pop though were they? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctor J Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 How much is people's perception of a genuine, live, energetic rock performance coloured by years of media saturation of miming to pre-recorded, studio quality tracks? I don't have too much of a problem with Blur's performance there. They were a great band in their day and I enjoyed every Blur gig I ever went to. They're giving it a bit of energy there, they're putting on a show, it's a bit much to be expecting a studio quality performance, especially vocally when your lungs have to push the words out as well as throw shapes. Perhaps they were overdoing it a little considering they were trying to energise an audience of biz types sitting at their dinner tables? Put that performance into a sweaty club filled to the brim with people who aren't scared to crumple their tuxedos and it might make a little more sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahpook Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 [quote name='Doctor J' timestamp='1330184374' post='1553865'] How much is people's perception of a genuine, live, energetic rock performance coloured by years of media saturation of miming to pre-recorded, studio quality tracks? [/quote] i'd say this is definately a factor when rating a 'proper' band's live performance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.