 |
 |
 |
1. INTRODUCTION
The use of recorded music and digitised music devices in live productions and the use of playback by artists performing in TV programmes has become relatively commonplace. The Union recognises that there are occasions when logistical and/or economic reasons make it impractical to use musicians and singers playing and performing wholly live. The Union also recognises that a number of contemporary music genres have evolved from and rely upon the artful and creative use of recordings, we have many members who work with recordings and digitised sound in ways which are innovative, exciting and artistically valuable and the Union’s “Honesty Code” proposal is not directed at them.
However, what is beyond doubt is that a trend has emerged where recorded music is being used either as a way to increase already healthy profit margins or as a direct substitute for talent. At present the audiences who attend events where the live music performance has been replaced by a recording are seldom informed in advance that recordings will be used. Similarly, television viewers who witness a band or singer miming on a TV programme are unlikely to know whether the act is miming or performing live due to the universal use of microphones and wired up guitars/keyboards etc. In an age when the consumer has a legal right to expect clear and honest labelling of goods and services we believe that promoters and broadcasters have a duty to clearly inform customers when recorded music or playback is being used. The Union is therefore calling for promoters and broadcasters to sign up to an “Honesty Code”.
2. THE USE OF RECORDINGS/DIGITISED MUSIC DEVICES IN THEATRES AND MUSIC VENUES
The UK has a world class reputation for high quality theatrical productions. Equally, the UK punches well above its weight in respect of the contemporary music talent that it nurtures and develops to international success. In simple terms, the element of a performance that takes place in a theatre or music venue that makes it distinct from, for instance cinema is that audiences experience a one-off, highly personal, never to be repeated in exactly the same way live performance. We all recognise that it is the spontaneous uniqueness of live performance that is at the very heart of its appeal. If the performer is simply “going through the motions” whilst the audience hears a pre-recorded version of the artists latest release then it is at best a slightly more interesting experience than listening to the music at home and at worst akin to seeing the pre match warm-up and not the game. In short the Union believes that audiences should be informed in advance if recorded music is to be used in a production so that they can make an informed choice before buying the tickets. A properly observed “Honesty Code” would reward those productions which stayed true to the live music ethic.
3. THE USE OF PLAYBACK BY ARTISTS PERFORMING IN TV PROGRAMMES
The Union recognises that for many years programme makers and, in some cases record companies, have generally preferred for the artists who appear on television to mime to a backing track. This is due to the comparative ease of using playback as opposed to catching, balancing and broadcasting a live performance; and also, from the record companies/artist manager’s point of view, quality control issues. Nevertheless, the viewing public have of late clearly demonstrated their preference for artists to perform live on TV which can be witnessed by the continued success of programmes such as Jools Holland’s “Later” which features live performance exclusively, and the continuing demise of programmes such as Top of the Pops which, still relies heavily on artists performing to backing tracks. The problem is that, due to the fact that performers who mime vocals and/or use backing tracks appear to all intents and purposes to be performing live (through the needless use of microphones, instrument leads and amplifiers etc.) those artists that actually do perform live appear indistinct from the acts that mime. Therefore there is neither the incentive nor the just reward for artists who have the talent and take the trouble to deliver a truly live performance on TV.
4. THE UNION’S PROPOSAL FOR AN “HONESTY CODE”
We would like to see all producers, managers and promoters sign up to an “Honesty Code” that would require them to clearly label all of their advertising for productions where recorded music is being used. We would suggest that the statement “RECORDED MUSIC IS BEING USED IN THIS PRODUCTION” should be clearly visible on all of the promotional and marketing material associated with the production so that audiences can be in no doubt about the nature of the production. We believe that provided that the “Honesty Code” was widely adopted it would reward the productions that continued to feature genuine live music.
Equally, we would like programme makers to adopt a similar “Honesty Code” when artists mime or use playback in TV programmes. We suggest that artists who mime have no need of microphones and musicians who use playback have no need of guitar leads and amplifiers etc. and should therefore mime without them. That way the viewer would always know exactly what it was they were watching and listening to.
The thrust of the “Honesty Code” is twofold. Firstly, to enable consumers to make informed decisions before parting with money for event tickets and to recognise the true nature and inherent value of an artists TV appearance. Secondly, to properly recognise and reward those artists, producers, promoters and programme makers who continue to value and support live music performance. |
 |
|
(fields marked with * are required)
|
|
|
The Musicians' Union represents over thirty thousand musicians working in all sectors of the music business.
As well as negotiating on behalf of our members with all the major employers in the industry, we offer a range of services for professional and student musicians of all ages.
Please discover how we can help you by exploring our web site
http://www.musiciansunion.org.... |
|
The views expressed in this petition are solely those of the petition's
sponsor and do not in any way reflect the views of iPetitions.
iPetitions is solely a provider of technical services to the petition
sponsor and cannot be held liable for any damages or injury or other
harm arising from this petition. In the event no adequate sponsor is
named, iPetitions will consider the individual account holder with which
the petition was created as the lawful sponsor.
|
|
|
