Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

Well, well. A very interesting review we have here in "An Insult To The Funk Brothers," so if I may be permitted, I'd like to explore it a bit. I'm not the producer of the film or soundtrack but I did work on the project and know all the "behind the scenes" details. First let's look at the concept of "untarnished live performances." Where in the film or related PR material have the producers stated that these were live performances? This was not a concert. It was six straight days-one artist per day-of recording and filming. Each song was taken five or six times with an invited audience watching and understanding that we would be stopping and starting, just like in any film. These were individual scenes-not parts of a continuous live concert. These performances were no different than a studio session. The only difference was that they happened to be on a stage in front of an audience. The Royal Oak Theater was treated as a soundstage for a film shoot-not a concert. Secondly, even if it was a "live" concert performance, with the exception of James Brown's `Live At The Apollo' and a few other early live albums, all live albums are edited and corrected when possible. The desired result is good sounding music that moves you-not rigid authenticity to a concept of "untarnished live performances." Most of the most celebrated live albums of all time have been doctored to death. By comparison, `Standing In The Shadows Of Motown' has very few added parts (other than strings) when compared to other live albums. As for the added vocal parts you claimed are "slathered on" to the live tracks of "What Becomes Of The Brokenhearted," you're dead wrong. All those parts were sung live by the four background vocalists and every time there's a close up of them, they sync up perfectly with the picture. I find it interesting that the objection to hearing a string section that can't be seen in the film is not echoed in hearing horns on "You've Really Got A Hold On Me" that also can't be seen. (They were actually there in an isolation booth on the side wall of the Snakepit.) I also find it interesting that "Reach Out" was brought up as an example of editing two performances pieced together with "scotch tape"-the justification for this conclusion being the ears of the critic who hears a jump in the tempo. There are actually a few tracks which have edits from other takes. "Reach Out" is not one of them. That performance is a complete and continuous single pass. The jump in tempo that was referred to is the natural ebb and flow of live musicians who breathe, and occasionally speed up and slow down. If you want metronomic regularity in your tempos, buy a drum machine or listen to click-track disco. So let's get into the concept of the added strings. The same strings are heard both in the soundtrack CD and in the film. If I were to lie and tell you the strings were in the concert hall but were situated in the orchestra pit or were placed offstage, the "untarnished live performance" argument would be rendered moot. The fact is, the stage was too small and cluttered to have a dozen strings added to the already overcrowded visuals. They couldn't be in the picture and would have had to be out of sight, offstage. At that point, there's no difference between them being a studio overdub at another time or a live feed to a remote location in the theater. They're still just reacting to what they hear in a set of headphones. At Motown-with the exception of some very early sessions-the strings were always an overdub anyway. How is this different? In fact, Motown doctored, edited, and overdubbed to death many of their most beloved 60s masters so the "untarnished live" authenticity wasn't even there in the originals. If overdubs and editing is the criteria for this critic's objections, I find it strange that there are eight other performances devoid of the "problems" he mentions yet he fails to praise these tracks for that same "untarnished" authenticity. Additionally, he seems to be the defender of the Funk Brothers artistic integrity even though they unanimously voted for the added strings. I guess he knows what's good forthem and how they want their music to sound more than they do. Instead of feigning mock indignation, and if you're so concerned about the Funk Brothers welfare, don't write and post vicious, uninformed, amateur musicological critiques that hurt their chances of ever getting recognition and some financial rewards through the only album ever released in their name. So I'll tell you what I'm gonna do. I'm going to give this CD soundtrack nine stars: five of five for my review and an extra four for the missing stars in your one star review. Now don't you feel better?