| Author |
Topic: Taking duets with the dead too far |
Janice Brooks
From:
Pleasant Gap Pa
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 4:11 am |
|
Anita Cochran's debut single does Natalie and Nat King Cole one
> better. She sings with the late Conway Twitty, on a song he never
> recorded. Cochran's spokeswoman says "(I Wanna Hear) A Cheatin'
> Song" is the first recording ever to create an all-new performance
> from an artist who's passed on.
>
> Twitty's vocal contribution to Cochran's original tune was
> painstakingly assembled from words and phrases from tracks he did
> record. Cochran's spokeswoman says the project took more than eight
> months to piece together.
>
> The timing of the record's release is as poignant as hearing Twitty
> sing new material. The song will be shipped to radio next Monday,
> two days after the anniversary of Twitty's death on June fifth of
> 1993.
>
> Cochran's debut single, "(I Wanna Hear) A Cheatin' Song," is the
> first from her upcoming album, "God Created Woman."
>
Coverage coming in USA Today
|
|
|
|
Bill Llewellyn
From:
San Jose, CA
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 5:27 am
|
|
That reminds me of the Steve Martin movie, Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid, where he co-stars with the then late Humphrey Bogart who appeared in snippets and, I think, had voice-overs done for him to make the dialog fit.
This kind of thing will increase in frequency, I think. Just like they can now generate completely digital characters in movies like the Star Wars series and Lord of the Rings, they will soon be able to place deceased actors in movies (convincingly!) by digitally recreating them. Completely synthesizing a voice, not just pasting together snippets, will also come.
Then the debating will begin as to who owns the rights to a deceased individual's persona. Who should get paid for their "acting" or "singing"? Should their family or estate get some kind of stipend...?
------------------
Bill, steelin' since '99 | Steel page | My music | Steelers' birthdays | Over 50? |
|
|
|
Jim Cohen
From:
Philadelphia, PA
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 5:59 am
|
|
One thing's for certain: BMI will be there, with its hand outstretched...  |
|
|
|
Theresa Galbraith
From:
Goodlettsville,Tn. USA
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 6:03 am
|
|
| Wow! I'm anxious to hear it, hope Anita used steel. |
|
|
|
Tim Whitlock
From:
Colorado, USA
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 6:10 am
|
|
| Have they no shame? This is just plain wrong! |
|
|
|
Jerry Hayes
From:
Virginia Beach, Va.
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 6:32 am
|
|
They've been doing this for a long time. Remember the Deborah Allen duet with Jim Reeves on "Oh How I Miss You Tonight". It was really a great cut. That was out before I left California in '85. Can't wait to hear this one....JH
By the way Janice, that's not her debut single. Remember the big record she had with Steve Wariner. It was a single off her first album. She's also one helluva lead guitar picker who can hold her own with the big boys....JH
------------------
Livin' in the Past and the Future with a 12 string Mooney Universal tuning.
[This message was edited by Jerry Hayes on 03 June 2004 at 07:34 AM.] |
|
|
|
Hook Moore
From:
South Charleston,West Virginia
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 6:39 am
|
|
Its a great idea, before long we will not need to find pretty people to do music videos either. Just completely create them from computer, image and audio. Think of the money record companys will be able to save 
Hook
------------------
HookMoore.com
|
|
|
|
Andy Volk
From:
Boston, MA
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 6:43 am
|
|
Kenny G did this a few years ago with a Louis Armstrong record and inspired the ire of Pat Metheny, among others.
http://www.jazzguitar.com/features/kennyg.html
Gee ... think of the possibilities ...
Bruce Springsteen and ... Alfalfa
Sheryl Crowe and ... Rudy Valee
Seal and ... Ritchie Valens
Whitney houston and ... Ethel Merman (a dueling rendition of "I will always love you" and "There's No Business Like show Business".
There's no such thing as good taste when there's a buck to be made.
[This message was edited by Andy Volk on 03 June 2004 at 07:46 AM.] |
|
|
|
Tim Whitlock
From:
Colorado, USA
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 7:16 am
|
|
Yes, presumptuous artists such as Hank Jr, Natalie Cole and Deborah Allen have been indulgently overdubbing their voices onto the works of the deceased for years. I find that practice questionable, distasteful and disrespectful, in itself.
This, however is something entirely new and sinister. Taking a dead man's voice, digitalizing it and creating a completely new work is immoral, souless, highly offensive and disrespectful to the artist, in my point of view. How anyone could find this sort of fakery entertaining is beyond me. What gives them the right to do this? The almighty dollar and enough mindless folks who will swallow whatever repugnant "new" high-tech garbage is shoved down their throats, IMHO. |
|
|
|
Donny Hinson
From:
Glen Burnie, Md. U.S.A.
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 7:40 am
|
|
| Bill, if you liked that Steve Martin movie, get a copy of the movie "The Man With Bogart's Face". Robert Sacchi plays Bogart better than Bogey himself! |
|
|
|
Janice Brooks
From:
Pleasant Gap Pa
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 8:20 am
|
|
In the case of Hank Williams Jr, the world had not heard There's A Tear In My Beer by
Hank Sr. The only doctoring was video so I
approve.
Natalie Cole adapted her vocals to Nat's so I approve.
However in this case I think it goes too far
and it's a wonder Conways family did or possibly could not object.
------------------
Janice "Busgal" Brooks
ICQ 44729047
|
|
|
|
Walter Stettner
From:
Vienna, Austria
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 8:35 am
|
|
The trick isn't all new, although with todays technics they can do by far more (digitally!) than 25 years ago. I remember the Jim Reeves/Patsy Cline duet that appeared on some albums around 1980 ("Have You Ever Been Lonely"). They called it a technical masterpiece back then. Technical masterpiece? Probably, but musically worthless.
This new thing is simply disgusting to me and I sure hope it will not create another "goldrush" in music business. I don't want to listen to "new" material of Waylon, Tammy, Faron and the others who have already left us.
I refuse to buy any record with tracks like that on it. Unfortunately that's as much as I can do.
Kind Regards, Walter
www.austriansteelguitar.at.tf
------------------
[This message was edited by Walter Stettner on 03 June 2004 at 09:37 AM.] |
|
|
|
Ben Slaughter
From:
Madera, California
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 8:37 am
|
|
Anita's been around for a while. She did have that hit with Steve Warner, and released about 2 albums. I mixed sound for a show she did in Fresno probably 3 years ago, at the zoo of all places. She must have signed up with a new record company cause she lost her deal.
She did play lead guitar pretty well. No steel, couple guitars and keys.
------------------
Ben
Zum D10, NV400, POD, G&L Guitars, etc, etc. |
|
|
|
David Mason
From:
Cambridge, MD, USA
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 6:11 pm
|
|
| That Duane Allman/Jimi Hendrix jam should be really hot.... |
|
|
|
Robbie Bossert
From:
WESCOSVILLE,PA,U.S.A.
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 6:29 pm
|
|
Piecing together words from hundreds of songs to make 1 or 2 verses to a new song that Conway was never even alive to hear? (Insert Twilight Zone Music Here). That rates right up there with human cloning and Stephen Hawking's mechanical conversations!
Robbie Bossert |
|
|
|
Janice Brooks
From:
Pleasant Gap Pa
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 6:46 pm
|
|
| And it looks like the family approves ??!!!!! |
|
|
|
Jennings Ward
From:
Edgewater, Florida, R.I.P.
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 7:11 pm
|
|
| QUESTION!!!!! Will it be any better than what the industry is putting out now and CALLING " COUNTRY"? Reguards, Jennings |
|
|
|
Bill Llewellyn
From:
San Jose, CA
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 7:35 pm
|
|
| This all begs a question: What would the deceased performer think or feel if they heard what had been done to make a "new" performance of theirs? Would they approve? Object? Are these songs ones they would have chosen to do given the chance? Or refused? Some would be flattered by this cloning process, some would find the practice reprehensible. But it's hard to know who would do what in each case. It is indeed a grey area. [This message was edited by Bill Llewellyn on 03 June 2004 at 08:37 PM.] |
|
|
|
Ken Lang
From:
Simi Valley, Ca
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 8:37 pm
|
|
Hey, it's pushing the envelope of what can be done, and will continue to be done. That it's fake is not the point, I believe. It's a demonstration of advancing technology. Whether we like the result, or think it's not right, is moot for those putting it together.
I liked the Hank Jr and Nat cole videos. We understand they were not real, but they give us little idea of what might have been. |
|
|
|
Rich Weiss
From:
Woodland Hills, CA, USA
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 10:28 pm
|
|
It's just a version of 'sampling', and it's finally come to country music. When there's no more creativity to give, they invent a new vehicle. Watch for the 'remix' phenomenon to enter the scene.
|
|
|
|
Ernie Renn
From:
Brainerd, Minnesota USA
|
Posted 4 Jun 2004 12:24 am
|
|
The only good thing I can see that will come of this is that finally with a little effort, Merle Haggard, George Jones and Ray Price will be able to sing every song.
------------------
My best,
Ernie
www.buddyemmons.com |
|
|
|
Mike Perlowin
From:
Los Angeles CA
|
Posted 4 Jun 2004 5:24 am
|
|
I think it's kind of creepy. But I guess the bottom line is the quality of the results. If somebody uses this technology to create something that is totally artificial, but nonetheless beautiful, then the music should be accepted for what it is.
We all grew up with the idea that music was something that people performed live, and the recording studio was sort of a sonic camera, capturing a moment of sound the way a camera captures a visual image. But with todays technology, it is possible to do much more.
Rather than worry about how a recording was made, we should base or feelings about it on whether or not it's any good.
|
|
|
|
Tim Whitlock
From:
Colorado, USA
|
Posted 4 Jun 2004 6:13 am
|
|
| Resectfully, Mike, even if it was excellent, would you approve of someone taking digital snippets of your playing, piecing it together and presenting it as a new work by Mike Perlowin? Would anyone?. The artist builds HIS body of work, HIS vision, on the choices HE makes of what songs to perform, what notes to play, how to play them, etc. Music, as well as all art, is the ultimate form of subjective expression. This kind of objectification, presuming that an artist's work boils down to 0's and 1's to be manipulated according to just anyone's whim, is the antithesis of art. That this is going to be marketed with Conway Twitty's name, even though he had nothing to do it, is grossly unfair to him, God rest his soul. Maybe they should dig up the corpse, attach strings to it and have it dance around to complete this necromantic fraud. [edited for typos] [This message was edited by Tim Whitlock on 04 June 2004 at 07:55 AM.] |
|
|
|
Ernie Renn
From:
Brainerd, Minnesota USA
|
Posted 4 Jun 2004 6:56 am
|
|
Obviously a deal was made somewhere with the Twitty family. I would think they own all the rights to Conway stuff, at least to his image/likeness. MCA may own the rights to his recorded music, which might include each and every word included in the tune, (which I hadn't even heard of until I read this thread.)
------------------
My best,
Ernie
www.buddyemmons.com |
|
|
|
Mike Perlowin
From:
Los Angeles CA
|
Posted 4 Jun 2004 9:19 am
|
|
Tim, I think I didn't make myself clear enough, and we're taling about 2 different things here. I think what they did to Conway Twitty is creepy, and to call it a new recording by him is a misrepresentation. I think we agree that's just plain wrong.
Leaving the necrophelia and ripping off of the artist's name and work aspects out of it, I think that there is nothing wrong artificially creating a recording of something that cannot be duplicated on stage (as I have done).
I should mention that in a classical music forum, I have been very heavily criticised by 3 people for using studio trickery to create my CDs. They seem far more concerned with the way I recorded them than with the quality of the music, so I'm a little defensive about this issue.
I might add that these same people also object to my playing "their" music on a steel guitar, and one of them wrote that the steel was not a real musical instrument, but rather a toy on the same level as a kazoo. |
|
|
|
