Top of The Pops? Rachel Stevens? REAL microphones?

[poppydoodles]

What was going on tonight. Rachel looked at state, to begin. I hate the hair. The dancing was irrelevant. Too rigid (I know they were going for that look, but it suited their clothes and not the song) And I think she was actually singing. LIVE. PROPERLY.

I need a lie down.

[tOMMYp3]

No, she was miming to a pre-recorded 'live' backing track I think. (I loved the hair though.... and the dancing... and the gloves... and the song.)

[Steveweiser]

That was miming, but Rachel looked fine. Nice boobies...

[jonnyboy]

Was it really though I did think she sang over a fairly loud backing track as she had aload of wires everywhere. But who cares she's great!

[nencipoo]

Wow, that performance was just excellent. She blew me and all the audiences away. She got the crowd going and she was just truly ace. I feel at #1 coming. I can't wait until tomorrow's performance at CD:UK.

[Ronald Parisi]

OKay I think Rach did the verses live, but not the chorus or hook. It was definatly not the original though. It was even a little flat at one point. But i loved it!

Hopefully she'll change something up for the CD:UK performance.

[toby3000]

She was obviously not live. She wasn't even mineing that well.

[nencipoo]

It is indeed live and mime. She sang onto a back track when she was not dancing. However, she was miming during the chorus. Nonetheless, a perfect and excellent performance by my favourite, Rachel Stevens.

[onrequest]

nencipoo said:

It is indeed live and mime. She sang onto a back track when she was not dancing. However, she was miming during the chorus. Nonetheless, a perfect and excellent performance by my favourite, Rachel Stevens.

I somehow think if she'd have been singing live, the presenters on each occasion would have mentioned it, surely?

"Now, singing live, here's Rachel Stevens!"

Sounds and looks like the whole thing is mimed to a "live vocal" backing track.

[Snuff]

The problem is that Rachel's "live" backing track isn't actually bad. So whereas Britney's backing track was quite shit and you could tell she was "live". Rachel's is quite good and you wonder if it's "live", "recorded live" or just the CD.

[onrequest]

That's true. The difference between her "live" vocal and perfected studio vocal is negligible.

[Dan]

Top Of The Pops

VERSES ---> 100% live
CHORUS --> Recorded 'live'

I don't blame her, it's just that with that choreography singing live the whole song it's just so tired and... it's ok this way, she sings live a bit, then her voice rests, then back to live

Her hair wasn't the best, but ther body was =D
Did you see all the people screaming for her? WOW, THEY ALL LOVED HER... and the other performances aren't bad either, are awesome

[onrequest]

I thought we had established that it's not live at all? If you watch her popworld performance it sounds live, but her headset mic is down by her madam's apple at some points.

[Dan]

I was talking about her TOP OF THE POPS one... obviously the popworld one isn't live ie

[drbastard]

I seen her for two seconds and I turned the television over...


...to the much more interesting and better Charlotte Church.


There's nothing about Rachel that stands out bar her looks. She's a mong.

[nencipoo]

Charlotte Church is low-life ugly monster who takes quite up a lot of fags now and then. Her voice will get ruined sooner or later. BYE BYE CHURCHY

[Adem]

wow.

i like them both.

*shrugs*