• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

RHCP Air Guitar

#22
Yup. lame excuse. "No choice" my a**. They could have chosen not to do the show. And they did not need "exposure". They are known worldwide. They did it for the money.
And saying "our music is sacred.." LOL equally lame statement. Because it obviously isn't. They "whored" their music out. And took the money.

They did have a choice, and to say they didn't is more BS. Why not be honest and just say "They offered us a ****-ton of money to do it, and we took it." Trying to justify it is pathetic.
No one forced them to do it. They agreed to it.
 
#24
The crux of the issue is this (from Flea's statement): "There was not any room for argument on this, the NFL does not want to risk their show being botched by bad sound, period."

Personally, I don't care that the RHCP (and Bruno Mars) faked their performances. The NFL is only giving the public what they've repeatedly demanded: perfection without regard for talent or substance.

I do, however, think that any not-fully-live "performances" should be clearly labelled as such...
 
#26
This seems like an awful lot of butthurt over a 1/4" plug of an instrument cable.

I doubt if the NFL gives a pair of fetid dingoes kidneys over the musical integrity of their halftime acts. What they want is a spectacle that will hold the attention of the biggest tv audience there is. And they need some puppets that are willing to be dangled on that stage for a few minutes.

Those who are suggesting they should have refused the gig need to get over themselves. You dont turn down the superbowl gig short of a medical emergency. You just dont.
 
#27
Disagree ^

An up an coming act......sure.

The Red Hot Chili Peppers???????
They had a choice, they could have politely declined. Their career, their legacy has been set. The only thing putting on a "fake" performance can do is put a little tarnish on it. IMO
 
#28
I understand RHCP's stance with keeping it real by not plugging a cable into their instruments, but I just can't agree with it. Why invite controversies? By just taking that 5 seconds to plug the instruments into wireless clip-ons, Flea could've saved probably more than an hour in writing that mea culpa, not to mention the tarnishing of the band's reputation as not everyone has read his tweet. :rollno:
 
#30
I am sick of hearing you snotty "eliteists" hating on RHCP for how they handled it. They are a great band that have been around for years, and whether or not you like their music, their talent is obvious. They are all big football fans and it was a treat for them to get to play the Super Bowl, and they obviously debated it, but in the end decided it would be a fun experience and made the most of it. End of story. Sorry none of you haters will ever reach anything close to the success they have. And no, I'm not a giant RHCP fan but their talent is clear, and they've earned the right to do what they did. And for those bitching about "I don't pay to see them mime", they weren't playing a festival or a concert, it was a "performance" at a sporting event. SHUT UP.
 
#32
RHCP IS a great band. But they pulled an instrumental Milli Vanilli at the Superbowl and there's no getting around that. As much as Flea tried to justify it with his statement it was still a total pretend. They're one band I never expected to see sell out
like that.
 
#35
mancefine said:
I am sick of hearing you snotty "eliteists" hating on RHCP for how they handled it.........
Click to expand...


THIS is a musician's forum, not a dancing, acting, or miming forum....find a forum that addresses your sell out.

Last Sunday, the NFL gave a few musicians the chance to be actors...

Given a week's notice and a studio, my 18 year old could have knocked off all 3 instrumental parts the RCHP replayed Sunday...and he's not that great.
 
#36
I can only continue asking why those who see this as a mortal sin and inexcusable don't understand that some things are just done for the pure fun of it. Should we as musicians only do things that have justifiable artistic merit? Should we eschew any and all chances to go out and do something that sounds like a blast because it's not a serious musical endeavor? Should we all sit around and pretend that being out there in front of a billion people is only worthwhile if it's a serious performance?

Maybe I'm the one who just doesn't get it, but I don't think so... They did a gig at the Super Bowl and you didn't. They thought it sounded like a $#!+ load of fun and went out there. Don't condemn them for just wanting to have an experience that only a handful of people will ever have. If you're too much of an artiste to ever consider having fun, then you get to say no when the NFL calls you up to invite you...
 
#37
I've got on stage and played live stuff that is more shameful than if I had not been plugged in at the SUPERBOWL....

Money??? they're hardly struggling to put food on the table... they did it because it was fun to be a part of... People that get on a high horse about "must be pure live" don't understand the concept of entertainment and obviously have no idea of what it takes to generate any tolerable "live" sound in an arena with minutes to set up... If it were purely live, you all would be talking about how awful it sounded, how could they blow such a big show, and how success is given to the wrong musicians... blah blah blah

Ignorant. Appreciate stuff for what is instead of trying to make it something it's not. They obviously did not try to make it anything other than what it was.
 
#38
Mortal sin - no

Would I do it - yes

Would I pay to see RHCP do it? - no

Would I pay to see them live - sure.


I'm of the opinion that people pay to see events performed live, with the chance of the unexpected happening....that the unexpected may or may not be great.

Live concerts
Sports events
Saturday Night Live

Shoot, people even pay a higher cover charge to see and hear our silly band, vs the charge for the DJ, who is often free, but it is clear the DJ plays recorded music.
 
#40
Bredian said:
Yes, this is preferred




what will be acceptable when you pay for a concert?
Click to expand...

Didn't Australia require you put it on concert tickets that you will be lip syncing?

As much as I think it was a lame move on their part, especially trying to defend themselves about it, I don't really care. They should just say we wanted the cash, they certainly didn't need the exposure (or the money.)

As much as I am getting REALLY sick of these threads, there would be just as much if they did actually play. "Flea had fret noise at the super bowl. He suxors" and so on and so forth.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back