Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

McCartney STILL rocks!

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 5:02:13 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Jeez... just when I think he has hung on too long... McCartney rocks the house
at the StuporBowl halftime show.

How groovy was THAT?!?!?

Kids...take note. That is what a REAL singer sounds like! Woof!!!!



searching for peace, love and quality footwear
guido

http://www.guidotoons.com
http://www.theloniousmoog.com
http://www.luckymanclark.com

More about : mccartney rocks

Anonymous
February 7, 2005 5:02:14 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

JWelsh3374 wrote:
> Jeez... just when I think he has hung on too long... McCartney rocks the house
> at the StuporBowl halftime show.
>
> How groovy was THAT?!?!?
>
> Kids...take note. That is what a REAL singer sounds like! Woof!!!!
>

Best half time show in a long, well, maybe ever! Live singing, live
playing, and he brought the house down! Ahhh, what a breath of fresh air. :) 
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 5:02:14 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"JWelsh3374" <jwelsh3374@aol.comnojunk> wrote in message
news:20050206210213.14993.00000332@mb-m21.aol.com...
> Jeez... just when I think he has hung on too long... McCartney rocks the
house
> at the StuporBowl halftime show.
>
> How groovy was THAT?!?!?
>
> Kids...take note. That is what a REAL singer sounds like! Woof!!!!

Nice to see a geezer get out of the house and play with his own band.

dtk
Related resources
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 6:09:28 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

> > Jeez... just when I think he has hung on too long... McCartney rocks the
house
> > at the StuporBowl halftime show.
> >
> > How groovy was THAT?!?!?
> >
> > Kids...take note. That is what a REAL singer sounds like! Woof!!!!
>
> Best half time show in a long, well, maybe ever! Live singing, live
> playing, and he brought the house down! Ahhh, what a breath of fresh air.
:) 

I've never had lower expectations for a half-time show, and I've never been
more impressed. If Janet's tit caused a substitution of professionalism for
pretense, too bad she didn't go full frontal.
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 6:56:11 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

How old is Sir Paul?
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 6:56:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"DScott" <dlscott@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:vFBNd.3750$wK.1975@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> How old is Sir Paul?

He's 62 years old. (Unless you're a Flat-Earther, in which case you don't know
the actual birthdate of Replacement Paul. So, you're forced to ask Elvis. But,
of course, you can't find him.)

John LeBlanc
Houston, TX
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 6:56:13 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

John_LeBlanc wrote:
> "DScott" <dlscott@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:vFBNd.3750$wK.1975@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
>>How old is Sir Paul?
>
>
> He's 62 years old. (Unless you're a Flat-Earther, in which case you don't know
> the actual birthdate of Replacement Paul. So, you're forced to ask Elvis. But,
> of course, you can't find him.)
>


Actually, he died in 1969 in a horrible broken-windshield flaming car
wreck. The winner of the PM look-alike contest has been filling in ever
since. We do NOT know his real name or age.

Revolution Nine is an account of that, fairly easily decoded: get a
Thorens turntable, pull off the starter motor belt, put the needle in
the lead-out area of the record, and give it a push counter-clockwise
(in either hemisphere).

It was announced in the outro of I Am the Walrus. I'm surprised you
didn't know that.
February 7, 2005 6:56:14 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I thought 'Drive My Car' rocked. (The mix needed more of the keyboard
hook 'tho.)

But 'Live & Let Die needed the fireworks. My son and I cracked up after
I said "look at all the dancing kids on the field running around on
fire." And Hey Jude, while one of my alltime favorite codas, did not
quite connect for the halftime break of a Super Bowl.

Listen to me bitch - my Pats are still the Kings of Football !!!



David Correia
Celebration Sound
Warren, Rhode Island

CelebrationSound@aol.com
www.CelebrationSound.com




Did anyone else see the singer from Black Eyed Peas take off Charlie
Daniels huuuuge hat and put it on his own head during the pre game, on
field show? The world got to see, probably for the first time,
Charlie's hatless head. I saw it in HD. Yeeeewww.
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 10:11:19 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I was quite pleased to see him hold the show for four good songs. And it
goes to show that none of us are actually too old to do the job. Most of us
are just too old to become rock stars! <g>

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio

"JWelsh3374" <jwelsh3374@aol.comnojunk> wrote in message
news:20050206210213.14993.00000332@mb-m21.aol.com...
> Jeez... just when I think he has hung on too long... McCartney rocks the
house
> at the StuporBowl halftime show.
>
> How groovy was THAT?!?!?
>
> Kids...take note. That is what a REAL singer sounds like! Woof!!!!
>
>
>
> searching for peace, love and quality footwear
> guido
>
> http://www.guidotoons.com
> http://www.theloniousmoog.com
> http://www.luckymanclark.com
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 11:12:11 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"david" <ihate@spamo.com> wrote in message
news:070220050244303606%ihate@spamo.com...
>I thought 'Drive My Car' rocked. (The mix needed more of the keyboard
> hook 'tho.)
>

Further proof that it was live. I missed the pregame show, was it live? The
Alicia Keys segment was obviously not.
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 11:28:22 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Roger W. Norman wrote:

> Oops, shouldn't post before coffee. Long and Winding Road is McCartney's
> usual ending fare. Had to look it up.



"Will never disappear
I've seen that road before"

Now, maybe it's me, but that lyric ranks right down there with Eric
Burdon's "and for girls I had a bad yen".

Spector did that schmaltz justice. Too bad it made it onto the album.
Too bad I didn't write it.



> Man, this getting old is getting old.


you said it.
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 5:49:56 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Glad I'm not the only one who has always found post-Beatles McCartney
largely trivial (Silly Love Song) and sometimes pompous and over-blown.
(Admiral Halsey!) Still can't get over the fact that most critics
thought Lennon was the deep one.

S O'Neill wrote:
> Roger W. Norman wrote:
>
>> Oops, shouldn't post before coffee. Long and Winding Road is McCartney's
>> usual ending fare. Had to look it up.
>
>
>
>
> "Will never disappear
> I've seen that road before"
>
> Now, maybe it's me, but that lyric ranks right down there with Eric
> Burdon's "and for girls I had a bad yen".
>
> Spector did that schmaltz justice. Too bad it made it onto the album.
> Too bad I didn't write it.
>
>
>
>> Man, this getting old is getting old.
>
>
>
> you said it.
>
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 8:29:16 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Are we *sure* there were no taped vocals?


--

-S
If you're a nut and knock on enough doors, eventually someone will open one,
look at you and say, Messiah, we have waited for your arrival.
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 8:29:17 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Steven Sullivan wrote:
> Are we *sure* there were no taped vocals?

It is possible, but I don't think so. There is no question that all of
Paul's vocals were live, and his band mates seem to be doing all the
background vocals.
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 8:29:18 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <36pnrvF51svfjU1@individual.net>, Joe Sensor <crabcakes@emagic.net>
wrote:

> Steven Sullivan wrote:
> > Are we *sure* there were no taped vocals?
>
> It is possible, but I don't think so. There is no question that all of
> Paul's vocals were live, and his band mates seem to be doing all the
> background vocals.

It is still possible for real musicians to actually perform live and sound good,
although we haven't seen much of that lately.

I had to laugh at the CNN morning entertainment reviewers dissing McCartney.

-Jay
--
x------- Jay Kadis ------- x---- Jay's Attic Studio ------x
x Lecturer, Audio Engineer x Dexter Records x
x CCRMA, Stanford University x http://www.offbeats.com/ x
x---------- http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jay/ ------------x
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 8:29:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Jay Kadis wrote:


> It is still possible for real musicians to actually perform live and sound good,
> although we haven't seen much of that lately.


You can see a lot of real doing real, if you get away from the tube and
back into the audience.
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 8:29:20 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <aZKdnddP4KeLSJrfRVn-hw@omsoft.com>, S O'Neill <nopsam@nospam.net>
wrote:

> Jay Kadis wrote:
>
>
> > It is still possible for real musicians to actually perform live and sound
> > good,
> > although we haven't seen much of that lately.
>
>
> You can see a lot of real doing real, if you get away from the tube and
> back into the audience.
>

Or back on stage!

-Jay
--
x------- Jay Kadis ------- x---- Jay's Attic Studio ------x
x Lecturer, Audio Engineer x Dexter Records x
x CCRMA, Stanford University x http://www.offbeats.com/ x
x---------- http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jay/ ------------x
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 8:38:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <070220050244303606%ihate@spamo.com>, david
I thought the show was rockin' too.

Sounded great, and to me seemed to be very obviously LIVE.

I am surprised no one here mentioned the staging - maybe I am out of
the loop and this sort of thing is common, but I thought his stage
design was innovative as hell, very practical and very cool looking.
Putting the video screens for the people in the nosebleeds on four
compass-point thrusts was a great idea. The people in the far-away
seats can see the video while not looking away from the stage, and no
one's view is blocked by flown screens.

The other thing was how efficient that gounds crew and security were.
That fiels had not only the rolling stage on it, but thousands of fans.
They had all of the people off of the field, the entire staging and
rigging removed, and the grass and yard lines tweaked in UNDER FOUR
MINUTES. Amazing.

The pyro was great too - in PERFECT sync with the music.

JT

<ihate@spamo.com> wrote:

> I thought 'Drive My Car' rocked. (The mix needed more of the keyboard
> hook 'tho.)
>
> But 'Live & Let Die needed the fireworks. My son and I cracked up after
> I said "look at all the dancing kids on the field running around on
> fire." And Hey Jude, while one of my alltime favorite codas, did not
> quite connect for the halftime break of a Super Bowl.
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 9:24:00 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Joe Sensor <crabcakes@emagic.net> wrote:
> Steven Sullivan wrote:
> > Are we *sure* there were no taped vocals?

> It is possible, but I don't think so. There is no question that all of
> Paul's vocals were live, and his band mates seem to be doing all the
> background vocals.


Really? I see *lots* of people questioning it in the Internet -- not
to mention Tom Shales' front-page review in the Washington Post. Do you have some
inside info?


--

-S
If you're a nut and knock on enough doors, eventually someone will open one,
look at you and say, Messiah, we have waited for your arrival.
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 9:24:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <cu8bo0$gqu$2@reader2.panix.com>, Steven Sullivan <ssully@panix.com>
wrote:

> Joe Sensor <crabcakes@emagic.net> wrote:
> > Steven Sullivan wrote:
> > > Are we *sure* there were no taped vocals?
>
> > It is possible, but I don't think so. There is no question that all of
> > Paul's vocals were live, and his band mates seem to be doing all the
> > background vocals.
>
>
> Really? I see *lots* of people questioning it in the Internet -- not
> to mention Tom Shales' front-page review in the Washington Post. Do you have
> some
> inside info?

I noticed at least one place where Paul turned from his mic and the sound went
away. That would be hard to sync.

Is it really so hard to believe he could do it live?

-Jay
--
x------- Jay Kadis ------- x---- Jay's Attic Studio ------x
x Lecturer, Audio Engineer x Dexter Records x
x CCRMA, Stanford University x http://www.offbeats.com/ x
x---------- http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jay/ ------------x
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 9:24:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Steven Sullivan wrote:

> Really? I see *lots* of people questioning it in the Internet -- not
> to mention Tom Shales' front-page review in the Washington Post. Do you have some
> inside info?


Hahahaha.

Yah, I have some inside information. I watched it!
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 9:24:02 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Jay Kadis wrote:

> I noticed at least one place where Paul turned from his mic and the sound went
> away. That would be hard to sync.
>
> Is it really so hard to believe he could do it live?

I was having this argument with my wife who kept saying "turn it down,
why do you have to listen so loud". And it wasn't even that loud!
Anyway, if Paul lip synced that one, I'll eat my SM57!
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 9:28:56 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Jay Kadis <jay@ccrma.stanford.edu> wrote:
> In article <36pnrvF51svfjU1@individual.net>, Joe Sensor <crabcakes@emagic.net>
> wrote:

> > Steven Sullivan wrote:
> > > Are we *sure* there were no taped vocals?
> >
> > It is possible, but I don't think so. There is no question that all of
> > Paul's vocals were live, and his band mates seem to be doing all the
> > background vocals.

> It is still possible for real musicians to actually perform live and sound good,
> although we haven't seen much of that lately.

I didn't say it wasn't possible. But from what I'm hearing from people
who have actually hard McCartneyin concert (and have tapes of live shows),
this performance was rather suspiciously good-sounding. Others have
claimed the performance *looked* lip-synched to them; still others are
saying taht it was previously announced that taped backup vox would be
used; still others are pointing to differences between the audio of Paul's
chatter with the crowd and that of the musical bits.

I'm getting the impression from viewing this brewing debate, that a lot
of boomers/Beatles fans (I'm one) dearly want to believe that there
wasn't any tape help going on.

I thought it was great halftime show, btw.
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 9:28:57 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Steven Sullivan wrote:


>>It is still possible for real musicians to actually perform live and sound good,
>>although we haven't seen much of that lately.
>
>
> I didn't say it wasn't possible. But from what I'm hearing from people
> who have actually hard McCartneyin concert (and have tapes of live shows),
> this performance was rather suspiciously good-sounding.


S.T.F.U.
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 9:31:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

atter with the crowd and that of the musical bits.
>
> I'm getting the impression from viewing this brewing debate, that a lot
> of boomers/Beatles fans (I'm one) dearly want to believe that there
> wasn't any tape help going on.
>
> I thought it was great halftime show, btw.

There was definitely drum fills going on the drummer was not playing
perhaps they had a second drummer off field but I heard rolls that the
drummer just wasnt anywhere near

George
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 10:49:18 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Jay Kadis <jay@ccrma.stanford.edu> wrote:
> In article <cu8bo0$gqu$2@reader2.panix.com>, Steven Sullivan <ssully@panix.com>
> wrote:

> > Joe Sensor <crabcakes@emagic.net> wrote:
> > > Steven Sullivan wrote:
> > > > Are we *sure* there were no taped vocals?
> >
> > > It is possible, but I don't think so. There is no question that all of
> > > Paul's vocals were live, and his band mates seem to be doing all the
> > > background vocals.
> >
> >
> > Really? I see *lots* of people questioning it in the Internet -- not
> > to mention Tom Shales' front-page review in the Washington Post. Do you have
> > some
> > inside info?

> I noticed at least one place where Paul turned from his mic and the sound went
> away. That would be hard to sync.

> Is it really so hard to believe he could do it live?

No. Is it really so hard to believe it might have been sweetened?
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 10:49:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <cu8gnu$stm$3@reader2.panix.com>, Steven Sullivan <ssully@panix.com>
wrote:

> Jay Kadis <jay@ccrma.stanford.edu> wrote:
> > In article <cu8bo0$gqu$2@reader2.panix.com>, Steven Sullivan
> > <ssully@panix.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > Joe Sensor <crabcakes@emagic.net> wrote:
> > > > Steven Sullivan wrote:
> > > > > Are we *sure* there were no taped vocals?
> > >
> > > > It is possible, but I don't think so. There is no question that all of
> > > > Paul's vocals were live, and his band mates seem to be doing all the
> > > > background vocals.
> > >
> > >
> > > Really? I see *lots* of people questioning it in the Internet -- not
> > > to mention Tom Shales' front-page review in the Washington Post. Do you
> > > have
> > > some
> > > inside info?
>
> > I noticed at least one place where Paul turned from his mic and the sound
> > went
> > away. That would be hard to sync.
>
> > Is it really so hard to believe he could do it live?
>
> No. Is it really so hard to believe it might have been sweetened?

Not considering the venue. But it would have been more for convenience than
necessity.


-Jay
--
x------- Jay Kadis ------- x---- Jay's Attic Studio ------x
x Lecturer, Audio Engineer x Dexter Records x
x CCRMA, Stanford University x http://www.offbeats.com/ x
x---------- http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jay/ ------------x
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 10:58:42 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

George Gleason <g.p.gleason@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> atter with the crowd and that of the musical bits.
>>
>> I'm getting the impression from viewing this brewing debate, that a lot
>> of boomers/Beatles fans (I'm one) dearly want to believe that there
>> wasn't any tape help going on.
>>
>> I thought it was great halftime show, btw.

> There was definitely drum fills going on the drummer was not playing
> perhaps they had a second drummer off field but I heard rolls that the
> drummer just wasnt anywhere near

Didn't catch that, but I hear some hihat action that sounded suspiciously
like samples. Just a little to pristine sounding for playing in
a football stadium in front of 60,000 people.

I also thought that all the instruments had a very clean/studio sound. I
was guessing that all the amps were enclosed in isolation boxes, and
possibly the drums were triggered samples.

But they were definitely singing live.

So who won the game, anyway? Man U?

Rob R.
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 11:26:21 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

j t wrote:
> Putting the video screens for the people in the nosebleeds on four
> compass-point thrusts was a great idea. The people in the far-away
> seats can see the video while not looking away from the stage, and no
> one's view is blocked by flown screens.

I thought it was cool and different, but what I couldn't figure out
was how they projected stuff on those big platforms that appeared
to be so close to the ground. Maybe my perspective was off and they
were actually higher up than they looked, but to me it didn't look
like they had the depth I'd think they'd need to get the projectors
the right distance from the screens/platforms.

> The pyro was great too - in PERFECT sync with the music.

It was. I have a longstanding disagreement with a friend over whether
the original McCartney version of "Live and Let Die" (my opinion) or
the Guns N' Roses remake (his opinion) is the better version. I think
McCartney scored some points against Guns N' Roses with this superbowl
version.

- Logan
Anonymous
February 7, 2005 11:29:41 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Logan Shaw wrote:
> j t wrote:
>
>>Putting the video screens for the people in the nosebleeds on four
>>compass-point thrusts was a great idea. The people in the far-away
>>seats can see the video while not looking away from the stage, and no
>>one's view is blocked by flown screens.
>
>
> I thought it was cool and different, but what I couldn't figure out
> was how they projected stuff on those big platforms that appeared
> to be so close to the ground. Maybe my perspective was off and they
> were actually higher up than they looked, but to me it didn't look
> like they had the depth I'd think they'd need to get the projectors
> the right distance from the screens/platforms.
>
>
first surface mirrors
or they could have been plasma screens ala video wall
I am sure it will be in the trades
most likely Sound And Communications
george
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 12:12:22 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I can't even believe this discussion. The music industry has become so
fake that people can no longer even believe that a live performance is
possible.


How sad.
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 12:13:34 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Joe Sensor <crabcakes@emagic.net> wrote:
> Steven Sullivan wrote:

> > Really? I see *lots* of people questioning it in the Internet -- not
> > to mention Tom Shales' front-page review in the Washington Post. Do you have some
> > inside info?


> Hahahaha.

> Yah, I have some inside information. I watched it!

er..ok, thanks for playing.

</gong>


--

-S
If you're a nut and knock on enough doors, eventually someone will open one,
look at you and say, Messiah, we have waited for your arrival.
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 12:13:35 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Steven Sullivan wrote:


>>Yah, I have some inside information. I watched it!
>
>
> er..ok, thanks for playing.


Well, if YOU can't tell, that is your problem, not mine. As Paul backs
off from the microphone, the volume drops, he moves his head a bit to
the side and you can hear the phasing (at least I could, maybe not you).
He does not do standard phrasing, or timing. It actually sounds and
looks live. Imagine that. .

If he is lip singing, he deserves an Oscar. Or maybe a Tony, awesome
acting job. <g>
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 12:16:47 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Joe Sensor <crabcakes@emagic.net> wrote:
> Steven Sullivan wrote:


> >>It is still possible for real musicians to actually perform live and sound good,
> >>although we haven't seen much of that lately.
> >
> >
> > I didn't say it wasn't possible. But from what I'm hearing from people
> > who have actually hard McCartneyin concert (and have tapes of live shows),
> > this performance was rather suspiciously good-sounding.

> S.T.F.U.

LOL. Are you always this infantile?



--

-S
If you're a nut and knock on enough doors, eventually someone will open one,
look at you and say, Messiah, we have waited for your arrival.
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 12:19:51 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Jay Kadis <jay@ccrma.stanford.edu> wrote:
> In article <cu8gnu$stm$3@reader2.panix.com>, Steven Sullivan <ssully@panix.com>
> wrote:

> > Jay Kadis <jay@ccrma.stanford.edu> wrote:
> > > In article <cu8bo0$gqu$2@reader2.panix.com>, Steven Sullivan
> > > <ssully@panix.com>
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > > Joe Sensor <crabcakes@emagic.net> wrote:
> > > > > Steven Sullivan wrote:
> > > > > > Are we *sure* there were no taped vocals?
> > > >
> > > > > It is possible, but I don't think so. There is no question that all of
> > > > > Paul's vocals were live, and his band mates seem to be doing all the
> > > > > background vocals.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Really? I see *lots* of people questioning it in the Internet -- not
> > > > to mention Tom Shales' front-page review in the Washington Post. Do you
> > > > have
> > > > some
> > > > inside info?
> >
> > > I noticed at least one place where Paul turned from his mic and the sound
> > > went
> > > away. That would be hard to sync.
> >
> > > Is it really so hard to believe he could do it live?
> >
> > No. Is it really so hard to believe it might have been sweetened?

> Not considering the venue. But it would have been more for convenience than
> necessity.


Who said anything about necessity? But at a gig where they've got ten minutes
or so to do setup, before playing 'live' to the largest TV audience of the year,
don't you think a bit more than *convenience* might be operating?
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 12:29:06 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Steven Sullivan wrote:

> But at a gig where they've got ten minutes or so to do setup, before
> playing 'live' to the largest TV audience of the year, don't you think a
> bit more than *convenience* might be operating?

Have you ever worked with a topnotch crew that is well preapred for such
an event? Do you have any understanding of how much setup can be taken
care of ahead of time?

I don't watch TV. I find amusing all this speculative punditry, as if
couch potatos have keen insight about what they're watching. So I have
no opinion about whether or not McCartney and his band played everything
live. But I do have knowedge about whether or not it could be possible,
even within the logistical constraints of the gig, and yes, it is
certainly possible.

--
ha
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 12:59:40 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

hank alrich <walkinay@thegrid.net> wrote:
> Steven Sullivan wrote:

> > But at a gig where they've got ten minutes or so to do setup, before
> > playing 'live' to the largest TV audience of the year, don't you think a
> > bit more than *convenience* might be operating?

> Have you ever worked with a topnotch crew that is well preapred for such
> an event? Do you have any understanding of how much setup can be taken
> care of ahead of time?

No, and yes. Do you have any idea how halftime at the Superbowl works?
And doesn't tape backup constitute a form of 'taking care ahead of time'?


> I don't watch TV. I find amusing all this speculative punditry, as if
> couch potatos have keen insight about what they're watching.

Then again, some of the people I'm seeing question the complete 'liveness'
of the event, actually watched it and listened to it, as it happened, and in
digital replay, on rather good A/V systems. Whereas you haven't.

And since you don't watch TV, you may not have a clue how very often
things are 'taken care of ahead of time' in all *kinds* of ways.

> So I have
> no opinion about whether or not McCartney and his band played everything
> live. But I do have knowedge about whether or not it could be possible,
> even within the logistical constraints of the gig, and yes, it is
> certainly possible.


Then again, no one said it *wasn't possible*. So maybe you should go
find someone else to argue with?
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 1:01:49 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Joe Sensor <crabcakes@emagic.net> wrote:
> Steven Sullivan wrote:


> >>Yah, I have some inside information. I watched it!
> >
> >
> > er..ok, thanks for playing.


> Well, if YOU can't tell, that is your problem, not mine. As Paul backs
> off from the microphone, the volume drops, he moves his head a bit to
> the side and you can hear the phasing (at least I could, maybe not you).
> He does not do standard phrasing, or timing. It actually sounds and
> looks live. Imagine that. .

Then again, no one is saying *none* of it was live.

So, I wonder what these folks are seeing/hearing? They seem to
have had at least as much 'inside information' as you do. PLus,
some of them taped it and watched it again.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=51...




--

-S
If you're a nut and knock on enough doors, eventually someone will open one,
look at you and say, Messiah, we have waited for your arrival.
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 1:01:50 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

McCartney aside, was the game real? It kind of looked like one of those Madden
football programs.

-Jay
--
x------- Jay Kadis ------- x---- Jay's Attic Studio ------x
x Lecturer, Audio Engineer x Dexter Records x
x CCRMA, Stanford University x http://www.offbeats.com/ x
x---------- http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jay/ ------------x
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 1:01:50 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Steven Sullivan wrote:

> So, I wonder what these folks are seeing/hearing?

Yeah, everyones a critic.
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 1:19:58 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

George Gleason wrote:

> first surface mirrors
> or they could have been plasma screens ala video wall
> I am sure it will be in the trades
> most likely Sound And Communications

LED walls with Glass on top. Roll it in, roll it out. Very cool.

--
Nathan

"Imagine if there were no Hypothetical Situations"
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 1:28:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Jay Kadis wrote:

> I noticed at least one place where Paul turned from his mic and the sound went
> away. That would be hard to sync.

I saw that too. But a really good mix meister could add a gate that would dump the
vox when McCartney wasn't triggering it...and thus eliminating the non live sync
problems.

> Is it really so hard to believe he could do it live?

I think just like the 'All You Need Is Love' broadcast years ago, they mixed real
and samples (or tape in that day). That's how it sounded to me.

But the fact of the matter is that the band were all singing playing and it sounded
like it. Even some of the minor pitch dips, including McCartney's and the dark
hair geetarist getting a little feedback out of his amps. Great live mix too.

--
Nathan

"Imagine if there were no Hypothetical Situations"
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 2:04:20 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Steven Sullivan wrote:

> Then again, some of the people I'm seeing question the complete 'liveness'
> of the event, actually watched it and listened to it, as it happened, and in
> digital replay, on rather good A/V systems.

I hope they had those twenty thousand dollar AC cables hooked to their
TV'S so they could see what was going on so much more clearly!

--
ha
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 2:11:43 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Steven Sullivan wrote:

> So maybe you should go find someone else to argue with?

Since I wrote:

> So I have no opinion about whether or not McCartney and his band played
> everything live.

you could consider finding a nearby adult education facility that offers
Remedial Reading for Content instruction.

--
ha
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 2:27:53 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Jay Kadis <jay@ccrma.stanford.edu> wrote:
> McCartney aside, was the game real? It kind of looked like one of those Madden
> football programs.

> -Jay
> --
> x------- Jay Kadis ------- x---- Jay's Attic Studio ------x
> x Lecturer, Audio Engineer x Dexter Records x
> x CCRMA, Stanford University x http://www.offbeats.com/ x
> x---------- http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jay/ ------------x


Do you employ this sort of logic when you lecture?

Then again, maybe you think those arrows that appeared on the turf
during certain moment of the game, must've been real too.

After all, you *saw* them.
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 2:30:15 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

He lip synched. It was obvious to everyone. What a disgrace.
Who still listens to this guy? People in nursing homes think he's a
fing bore.....
hank alrich wrote:
> Joe Sensor wrote:
>
> > Report? Now some geek spouting on an internet chat group becomes a
report?
>
> Maybe Sully doesn't have a TeeVee, either, so he has no way to make
up
> his own mind. Everybody knows chat's where it's at when you need a
life
> and can't find one.
>
> --
> ha
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 2:31:19 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

hank alrich <walkinay@thegrid.net> wrote:
> Steven Sullivan wrote:

> > Then again, some of the people I'm seeing question the complete 'liveness'
> > of the event, actually watched it and listened to it, as it happened, and in
> > digital replay, on rather good A/V systems.

> I hope they had those twenty thousand dollar AC cables hooked to their
> TV'S so they could see what was going on so much more clearly!

Well, having a TV at all would help for sure...does that exclude
you?

And it looks like the next most important piece to have, is a TiVo box.



--

-S
If you're a nut and knock on enough doors, eventually someone will open one,
look at you and say, Messiah, we have waited for your arrival.
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 2:38:39 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

hank alrich <walkinay@thegrid.net> wrote:
> Steven Sullivan wrote:

> > So maybe you should go find someone else to argue with?

> Since I wrote:

> > So I have no opinion about whether or not McCartney and his band played
> > everything live.

> you could consider finding a nearby adult education facility that offers
> Remedial Reading for Content instruction.

Given that you actually wrote *this*:

"I don't watch TV. I find amusing all this speculative punditry, as if
couch potatos have keen insight about what they're watching. So I have
no opinion about whether or not McCartney and his band played everything
live. But I do have knowedge about whether or not it could be possible,
even within the logistical constraints of the gig, and yes, it is
certainly possible."

And given that no one said anything about *impossible*, but rather whether
it was *possible* that the show was *not entirely live* (read that phrase
as slowly as necessary to understand, Hank, as each word in it means something),
all I can say is: after you.


--
-S
If you're a nut and knock on enough doors, eventually someone will open one,
look at you and say, Messiah, we have waited for your arrival.
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 2:39:32 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Joe Sensor <crabcakes@emagic.net> wrote:
> Steven Sullivan wrote:

> > So, I wonder what these folks are seeing/hearing?

> Yeah, everyones a critic.

But all critics are not equally observant.

--

-S
If you're a nut and knock on enough doors, eventually someone will open one,
look at you and say, Messiah, we have waited for your arrival.
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 2:54:35 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Steven Sullivan wrote:

> And then there's reports like this:
>
> http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showpost.php?p=930486...

Report? Now some geek spouting on an internet chat group becomes a report?

No, you're right. I'm sure McCartney was quite worried he couldn't
perform these songs, so he decided to lip the words to a taped track.
After all, he has only sang them about 5,000 times over the last nearly
40 years.

Just curious, how old are you, anyway?
!