Looks like the Boss band lipped their performance...

[slucero]

Wow this dudes ripping Bruce a new one... http://news.cnet.com/8301-13526_3-10157130-27.html



February 4, 2009 4:08 PM PST
Springsteen's Super Bowl sellout?
Posted by Matt Rosoff


Did you catch Bruce Springsteen's halftime performance on Sunday? Turns out, you were listening to The Boss sing to a prerecorded backing track.

According to this Chicago Tribune interview with Super Bowl pregame entertainment producer Hank Neuberger, only Springsteen's vocals were live (Jennifer Hudson and Faith Hill lip-synched).

As Neuberger correctly explains, it's impossible to set up a rock band for a live performance in five minutes and have anything approaching decent sound. Either you sing to a prerecorded backing track or you accept that millions of viewers are going to hear a crummy performance.

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if some of his vocals weren't live, either. In big rock 'n' roll productions, it's not uncommon to have a prerecorded vocal track running at the same time, and a sort of reverse-limiter running on the live vocals--if the input on the vocal mike drops below a certain volume, the track automatically switches over to the canned vocals.

In some cases, this is done to hide the flaws of singers who genuinely can't sing, or for aging singers who can't hit certain notes anymore. In other cases, it's simply to allow the singer more freedom to run, jump, slide into the TV cameras, and then magically resume the vocals without missing a note or even taking a breath. For the most part, audiences never notice.

Still, a lot of fans imagine that Springsteen operates at a higher level. I suppose that if there were some sort of thermometer that measures rock 'n' roll authenticity, the Boss would score near the top: he writes and sings his own songs, tours frequently, and plays long shows with a different set list every night.

But this wasn't about his live shows, which he has no problem selling out. This was about informing the tens (hundreds?) of millions of Super Bowl watchers that this singer they used to like back in the '70s and '80s has a new album coming out. This was a 15-minute commercial. And it seems to have worked--Working on a Dream enjoyed high positions on both Amazon.com and iTunes on the Monday, after the game.

At least the game wasn't fixed.

[Rockindeano]

I will resign from this board immediately if someone can prove he wasn't live. I know the man, he was live. He fucked up many notes and also ducked a few too.

A few points. The early songs he struggled more so than the latter two, meaning his voice opened up and was better equipped. Draw the parallel to Pineda as well. DSB, where he struggled, was the second song in the set. Coincidence?

Lastly, lest you think I would lie for Springsteen, you are mistaken. If that fucker lipped I would hate him. I can honestly say 100% he was live.

[Rick]

I will resign from this board immediately if someone can prove he wasn't live. I know the man, he was live. He fucked up many notes and also ducked a few too.

A few points. The early songs he struggled more so than the latter two, meaning his voice opened up and was better equipped. Draw the parallel to Pineda as well. DSB, where he struggled, was the second song in the set. Coincidence?

Lastly, lest you think I would lie for Springsteen, you are mistaken. If that fucker lipped I would hate him. I can honestly say 100% he was live.

I watched some of the performance, and there's no way he lipped anything I saw. As hammered as I was, it was obvious he was singing. That's about the time you texted me.

[Rockindeano]

I will resign from this board immediately if someone can prove he wasn't live. I know the man, he was live. He fucked up many notes and also ducked a few too.

A few points. The early songs he struggled more so than the latter two, meaning his voice opened up and was better equipped. Draw the parallel to Pineda as well. DSB, where he struggled, was the second song in the set. Coincidence?

Lastly, lest you think I would lie for Springsteen, you are mistaken. If that fucker lipped I would hate him. I can honestly say 100% he was live.

I watched some of the performance, and there's no way he lipped anything I saw. As hammered as I was, it was obvious he was singing. That's about the time you texted me.

Yeah he lipped Since when does Glory Days have the line, "I had a friend who was a great football player" and "he could throw that hail mary?" Also, The back and forth with Steve about Delay time, going home time, and Disneyland.

Nothing to see here.

[RobbieG]

I will resign from this board immediately if someone can prove he wasn't live. I know the man, he was live. He fucked up many notes and also ducked a few too.

A few points. The early songs he struggled more so than the latter two, meaning his voice opened up and was better equipped. Draw the parallel to Pineda as well. DSB, where he struggled, was the second song in the set. Coincidence?

Lastly, lest you think I would lie for Springsteen, you are mistaken. If that fucker lipped I would hate him. I can honestly say 100% he was live.

He was live just just not a 100%. Bruce and Stevie were live, their vocals were really bad. How do you know the man??
Lets be honest does it matter if the rest of band were tape enhanced?? Bruce was live that's all the matter right?

[The Sushi Hunter]

Lets be honest does it matter if the rest of band were tape enhanced??

Actually it does matter cause if the band playing doesn't sound quite right, it makes the vocals not sound quite right also.

Go out sometime and pick up a song your awesome at singing to, but pick it up on the most cheesiest quality karaoke disk that was ever made, like from Taiwan or Nepal and try and sing to it. You know you've got the shittiest quality arrangement when the song sounds like it was completely arranged on a shitty Casio 41 key synthesizer. And it won't matter how good you can sing that song, singing to that arrangement will make you sound like shit.

So if the band isn't sounding right, the vocalist won't either. And that's why the Boss karaoke'ing it at the Super Bowl was so less challenging then if he had gone out there live and was relying on the band to also go out there live.

[finalfight]

Don't know about the band but no way in hell Springsteen lipped. Out of breath, a couple of points playing catch up to the music and the odd bum note - it was definitely live. How anyone could think otherwise is just crazy talk.

[amaron]

Don't know about the band but no way in hell Springsteen lipped. Out of breath, a couple of points playing catch up to the music and the odd bum note - it was definitely live. How anyone could think otherwise is just crazy talk.

People said that about Journey too. (Not saying Springsteen did or didn't)

[finalfight]

Don't know about the band but no way in hell Springsteen lipped. Out of breath, a couple of points playing catch up to the music and the odd bum note - it was definitely live. How anyone could think otherwise is just crazy talk.

People said that about Journey too. (Not saying Springsteen did or didn't)

Doesn't matter what anyone says, Springsteen obviously didn't and Augeri obviously did. Big difference.

[The Sushi Hunter]

What gets me is every local news paper that has a write up in it about the Boss being pissed off at ticket master recently, they all show a very small pix of the Boss that was taken in the 80's. Why is that? They don't put a recent pix of him in the article, just one that he took in the 80's.

[Rockindeano]

What gets me is every local news paper that has a write up in it about the Boss being pissed off at ticket master recently, they all show a very small pix of the Boss that was taken in the 80's. Why is that? They don't put a recent pix of him in the article, just one that he took in the 80's.

The LA Times just ran the "Pissed off Story" and pictured a 2008 Boss.

[Rick]

What gets me is every local news paper that has a write up in it about the Boss being pissed off at ticket master recently, they all show a very small pix of the Boss that was taken in the 80's. Why is that? They don't put a recent pix of him in the article, just one that he took in the 80's.

The LA Times just ran the "Pissed off Story" and pictured a 2008 Boss.

This?

[wednesday's child]

What gets me is every local news paper that has a write up in it about the Boss being pissed off at ticket master recently, they all show a very small pix of the Boss that was taken in the 80's. Why is that? They don't put a recent pix of him in the article, just one that he took in the 80's.

The LA Times just ran the "Pissed off Story" and pictured a 2008 Boss.

This?

Well done!

[The Sushi Hunter]

What gets me is every local news paper that has a write up in it about the Boss being pissed off at ticket master recently, they all show a very small pix of the Boss that was taken in the 80's. Why is that? They don't put a recent pix of him in the article, just one that he took in the 80's.

The LA Times just ran the "Pissed off Story" and pictured a 2008 Boss.

It must be a San Francisco Bay Area thing then cause all the papers I've seen shows his picture that looks like it was taken of him back in 85'.

The media does shit like this for some reason in the bay area. Like when Heath Ledger died, the only pix in all the bay area papers they have ever showed of him after his death is a still out of the Brokeback Mountain movie. If a person didn't know any better, they would have thought that was the only movie he ever starred in.

I swear if Sean Penn makes front page news anytime, the only pix they will show of him in the bay area papers will be a still from the "milk" movie.