Charli XCX

[smogo]

9 hours ago, danbailey80 said:

Doesn't deny she mimed though.

 

She mentions not having a 'traditional' band. Not sure what is 'traditional' about having musicians. People have sung along to backing tracks forever. It is, and will always will be, just a bit sh*t.

I don't think she mimed; the sound quality when she was speaking and when she was singing was identical throughout. 

 

Maybe the viewers who claim she was miming didn't realise that there were guest verses (Shygirl, Billie Eilish etc) that were recordings on the backing tracks. 

 

And there's nothing "a bit sh*t" about using backing tracks. I can't stand these "real music" bores. It's not the 1960s anymore.

[Pipine]

There was a backing track obviously but you can clearly hear when she’s singing the much louder main vocal and when it’s just the backing track. If she was fully miming that would be poor, but she wasn’t.
 

I thought she was great - it’s a huge stage for one person to fill for an hour.. hats off to her. We were close to the crush barrier and the atmosphere was wild.. the show sounded and looked great.  I was sad that there was no Lorde but happy to finally see the Brat tour. 

[The Nal]

Not much difference between when she's singing and the backing track. 

 

 

No issues with backing tracks and/or a bit of help but there's a line. 

 

Anyone see En Vogue? f**ks sake. 

[Furq]

2 hours ago, The Nal said:

Not much difference between when she's singing and the backing track. 

No issues with backing tracks and/or a bit of help but there's a line. 

 

Disagree!

 

You can clearly hear the difference when she drops off after "when". It's a blended vocal effect. Many artists use it now.

 

Personally, I find the debate quite tedious. It was a banging dance set with great visuals, and she's an engaging performer.

[northernangel]

Just to clear it up, why is there in anyway good performance wise of someone who lays on the floor, smacking her own arse while essentially dry humping the stage? Then getting up and still continuing not to sing? I mean, what the hell is that. 

[smogo]

1 minute ago, northernangel said:

Just to clear it up, why is there in anyway good performance wise of someone who lays on the floor, smacking her own arse while essentially dry humping the stage? Then getting up and still continuing not to sing? I mean, what the hell is that. 

 

"Performance": that's what good about it. 

 

Not everyone has to be a boring guitar playing singer, singing boring guitar songs.

[lefthandedopener]

I was at Neil Young, all pals who watched on tv have said she was miming and it was utterly dreadful. Not her demographic granted but have all also said Rodrigo was fantastic. Levels to the game as Charli has found out. 

[northernangel]

4 hours ago, smogo said:

 

"Performance": that's what good about it. 

 

Not everyone has to be a boring guitar playing singer, singing boring guitar songs.

 

There's no performance in that lol. Anyone, literally anyone can do that, I guess not everyone is wearing really short shorts/pants though playing upto the cameras. Funny how the first thing you instantly compare it to is a boring guitar player?; I just said a better performer generally. 

 

4 hours ago, lefthandedopener said:

I was at Neil Young, all pals who watched on tv have said she was miming and it was utterly dreadful. Not her demographic granted but have all also said Rodrigo was fantastic. Levels to the game as Charli has found out. 

100% this. Not even in the same bracket as each other.

[Furq]

10 hours ago, lefthandedopener said:

I was at Neil Young, all pals who watched on tv have said she was miming and it was utterly dreadful. Not her demographic granted but have all also said Rodrigo was fantastic. Levels to the game as Charli has found out. 

 

I cannot believe Charli XCX didn't appeal to friends of someone at Neil Young!!!!!!1

 

 

[Yokel Again]

I mean, could it be that some people prefer it to be live, and some don't care? I love the way conversations like this always have to bring 'real music bores' into it, or 'boomers'... I mean, it's just their opinion. Similarly, on the other side... etc. These things always seem to swing to people having super strong opinions either way. 

[danbailey80]

I'm not convinced it's purely an age thing and Charlie calling all comments to be from 'boomers' doesn't help. 

 

I know friend's children who much prefer, say Olivia's style/ performance than Charlie. 

 

It's not age it's preference to style of music/ what they want from a performance.

 

There has always been artists that 'perform' to backing tracks. It didn't appeal to me when I was a teenager in the 90s and it still doesn't. If anything I hated it more then than now.

 

Anyone remember the 'Keep Music Live' initiative?  This debate is not a new thing and it's not a load of old people not 'understanding' the new music.

Edited July 1, 2025 by danbailey80

[Yokel Again]

9 minutes ago, danbailey80 said:

I'm not convinced it's purely an age thing and Charlie calling all comments to be from 'boomers' doesn't help. 

 

I know friend's children who much prefer, say Olivia's style/ performance than Charlie. 

 

It's not age it's preference to style of music/ what they want from a performance.

 

There has always been artists that 'perform' to backing tracks. It didn't appeal to me when I was a teenager in the 90s and it still doesn't. If anything I hated it more then than now.

 

Anyone remember the 'Keep Music Live' initiative?  This debate is not a new thing and it's not a load of old people not 'understanding' the new music.

For me, it would be a sad time IF all our top acts ended up with backing tracks. And, to me, it seems like there's a rise in them these days. That said, that's popular music isn't it... much more likely these days to be made on a lap top based on loops etc than it would have been in the past. And also the cost of touring / having a band etc. I get it. 

[NorthernSoul52]

Has Charli ever toured with a sizable band out of interest?