DC Tom Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 Sorry, Mulder is helping me out with something right now. Landscaping the front?
Chef Jim Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 As opposed to, say, the 1980's, when idiots (I just assume record producers are) and a bunch of pre-teen bubble gum chewers selected Toni Basil as one of our stars. How many Grammys, Oscars, Broadway shows did Toni Basil produce? There's always been crap music, but along with it there has usually been great music. I'm not sure what constitutes great music these days?
ajzepp Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 How many Grammys, Oscars, Broadway shows did Toni Basil produce? There's always been crap music, but along with it there has usually been great music. I'm not sure what constitutes great music these days? I have my own definition of what great music is, as I'm sure you do too, but what creates great (i.e. successful) POP music is the public. Like I said above in the thread, the genius of the show is that they bring a bunch of nobodies with marginal (for the most part) talent in front of the American public, give us all (yourself excluded, of course....duly noted) a chance to get to know them, and then after a few months there exists enough interest in more than a few of them to where they can cut albums and make money for all involved. Do these folks define for me what great music is? Hell no! When someone audioned with a song from my favorite musician a month or two ago, Randy didn't even know who the hell Amos Lee was....and he's a successful record producer! Do you really think that the musicians you consider great today will ever be as popular or visible as someone like an American Idol winner? The show isn't about great music, but pop music itself isn't about great music. It's just like film....a LOT of what tops the box office charts pales in comparison to what you can find on the indy scene. A large budget doesn't define a great movie, you know? But it doesn't mean that from time to time I can still take enjoyment from that particular genre.
ajzepp Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 Landscaping the front? That was supposed to be your job! lol
ajzepp Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 Considering that only Clarkson and Underwood are making hit records, it goes to show that it's the songs that matter most. The same goes for TV shows; it's the writing. Lots of the former contestants have had hit records, actually. But the visibility they're gaining from the show and the likability that their cultivating has paid dividends big time for a lot of them, too. That's why you see them branching out into so many different areas of entertainment. I still say that one of the most popular contestants ever was Tamyra Gray from season one. She could do it all - sing, write, act, and she was beautiful on top of it all. You don't hear much about her today, but I promise you she's been very successful.
GoodBye Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 That was supposed to be your job! lol Mulder beat him to it!
Chef Jim Posted March 10, 2007 Posted March 10, 2007 I have my own definition of what great music is, as I'm sure you do too, but what creates great (i.e. successful) POP music is the public. Like I said above in the thread, the genius of the show is that they bring a bunch of nobodies with marginal (for the most part) talent in front of the American public, give us all (yourself excluded, of course....duly noted) a chance to get to know them, and then after a few months there exists enough interest in more than a few of them to where they can cut albums and make money for all involved. Do these folks define for me what great music is? Hell no! When someone audioned with a song from my favorite musician a month or two ago, Randy didn't even know who the hell Amos Lee was....and he's a successful record producer! Do you really think that the musicians you consider great today will ever be as popular or visible as someone like an American Idol winner? The show isn't about great music, but pop music itself isn't about great music. It's just like film....a LOT of what tops the box office charts pales in comparison to what you can find on the indy scene. A large budget doesn't define a great movie, you know? But it doesn't mean that from time to time I can still take enjoyment from that particular genre. Good post, but what is really missing is good musicianship. There are not as many good musicians as there used to be. With so much music being created via computer these days you don't need to be as good a musician. Being a musician myself it's pretty sad the direction music has headed in the 10-15 years.
ajzepp Posted March 10, 2007 Posted March 10, 2007 Good post, but what is really missing is good musicianship. There are not as many good musicians as there used to be. With so much music being created via computer these days you don't need to be as good a musician. Being a musician myself it's pretty sad the direction music has headed in the 10-15 years. Oh, I co uldn't agree more. That's partly why I've become so interested in a guy like Amos Lee. He has these podcasts on youtube where he describes his experiences with writing his music, playing with the guys, performing, etc. It's really interesting. He'll talk about how one of his songs ("night train", I believe) was inspired when he was sitting in a hotel room in France and just watching things go on outside the window. I love that he writes his own stuff and is passionate about just making music and sharing it with others. There's no cookie cutter, "pop star in a box" crap going on here.....I think this guy is probably more along the lines of what you'd admire, even though you may not have heard of him. He's just a good, pure musician with a great story. I dig that. And that's also why I like to get invovled and/or start music threads on here, cause a lot of you guys know a lot about music - GOOD music - and I love to get direction about where to look myself. So I totally understand where you're coming from, I guess I just can't help but find the AI thing interesting at the same time.
Oneonta Buffalo Fan Posted March 10, 2007 Posted March 10, 2007 I've been saying it since day 1. YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
/dev/null Posted March 10, 2007 Posted March 10, 2007 Sorry, Mulder is helping me out with something right now. I hope he isn't helping you drop a deuce in the school urinal
Fezmid Posted March 10, 2007 Posted March 10, 2007 Oh, I couldn't agree more. I actually have to disagree. While there may not be great mainstream musicians anymore, there are definitely amazing musicians out there. Ayreon (check out "The Human Equation" - there's all sorts of amazing instrucments in there, plus a great story to boot), Dream Theater (John Petrucci is one of the best guitarists out there), Trans Siberian Orchestra, etc, plus tons that I have probably never heard of before. It's not in the mainstream but it's there if you look for it. CW
In space no one can hear Posted March 10, 2007 Posted March 10, 2007 I actually have to disagree. While there may not be great mainstream musicians anymore, there are definitely amazing musicians out there. Ayreon (check out "The Human Equation" - there's all sorts of amazing instrucments in there, plus a great story to boot), Dream Theater (John Petrucci is one of the best guitarists out there), Trans Siberian Orchestra, etc, plus tons that I have probably never heard of before. It's not in the mainstream but it's there if you look for it. CW Oh yeah and don't forget Sufjan Stevens.
Chef Jim Posted March 10, 2007 Posted March 10, 2007 I actually have to disagree. While there may not be great mainstream musicians anymore, there are definitely amazing musicians out there. Ayreon (check out "The Human Equation" - there's all sorts of amazing instrucments in there, plus a great story to boot), Dream Theater (John Petrucci is one of the best guitarists out there), Trans Siberian Orchestra, etc, plus tons that I have probably never heard of before. It's not in the mainstream but it's there if you look for it. CW Thanks for helping me make my point. A quick search showed me that those groups/ensembles have been around for at least 10 years with musicians that are in their late thirties early forties I imagine. My point was in regard to the new music that has come out in the past say five years. The younger generation (yeah, I'm an old !@#$) does not have a lot of great solid musicians/song writers. Idol, case in point. Do any of them sing original stuff? I doubt it. You do realize Clapton was playing with the Yardbirds at the age of 18. He wrote Strange Brew and Sunshine of Your Love with Cream at the age of 21/22. And most musician/songwriters of that time were writing amazing stuff at the same age. Now I may be out of touch with today's music, but can someone give me anything that even comes close to what we saw in the early to mid sixties.
justnzane Posted March 11, 2007 Posted March 11, 2007 Thanks for helping me make my point. A quick search showed me that those groups/ensembles have been around for at least 10 years with musicians that are in their late thirties early forties I imagine. My point was in regard to the new music that has come out in the past say five years. The younger generation (yeah, I'm an old !@#$) does not have a lot of great solid musicians/song writers. Idol, case in point. Do any of them sing original stuff? I doubt it. You do realize Clapton was playing with the Yardbirds at the age of 18. He wrote Strange Brew and Sunshine of Your Love with Cream at the age of 21/22. And most musician/songwriters of that time were writing amazing stuff at the same age. Now I may be out of touch with today's music, but can someone give me anything that even comes close to what we saw in the early to mid sixties. You are right Jim, the better acts out right now are usually in their late 20's to early 30's when they start get the big break. The only exception in the past couple years from a legit talented artist that i can think of is Anna Nalick
EC-Bills Posted March 12, 2007 Posted March 12, 2007 Sorry, Mulder is helping me out with something right now. Ah, someone is trying to make Mark Rufalo jealous...
USMCBillsFan Posted March 12, 2007 Posted March 12, 2007 The younger generation (yeah, I'm an old !@#$) does not have a lot of great solid musicians/song writers. Idol, case in point. Do any of them sing original stuff? I doubt it. That's one of the things I really like about the "Rock Star" shows. (The ones with Brooke Burke) On the last one nearly all of the artist vying to become the lead singer actually performed their own songs they had written in addition to the traditional songs. I think many of them are far more talented than anyone on Idol. Don't get me wrong, I like a lot of the Idol perfomers and from an entertainment aspect I enjoy the show. Do I vote? No, but I still enjoy watching it. Big deal.
RuntheDamnBall Posted March 12, 2007 Posted March 12, 2007 Wow, I couldn't disagree more. The brilliance of American Idol is that it creates the fan base BEFORE the records come out, not the other way around. People get to know the contestants week in and week out, to the point where they are already fans before the singer has set foot in a recording studio. Not true. We were working on Kelly Clarkson, Clay Aiken and Ruben Studdard records in the studio before the season was over. They have to have at least a single done soon after the competition.
GoodBye Posted March 12, 2007 Posted March 12, 2007 Ah, someone is trying to make Mark Rufalo jealous... Eh, but he can't fight off the aliens.
ajzepp Posted March 12, 2007 Posted March 12, 2007 Not true. We were working on Kelly Clarkson, Clay Aiken and Ruben Studdard records in the studio before the season was over. They have to have at least a single done soon after the competition. I"m not sure I understand how this refutes my point? I'm saying that the fan base is being created DURING the show, and is already established once the records are released. The fact that they already have a feel for who should start working on albums before the season is over further shows that they have an idea of how the fan base is developing. I sincerely doubt they started working on a Clay Aiken album back when he auditioned. IIRC, he only made the finals because he was a wildcard vote by one of the judges. Then from there his fan base grew and grew, and I'm sure it was pretty clear well before the finale that he was going to be viable in terms of a recording artist. Now contrast this with Clay Aiken pre-Idol, trying to get some recording deal while he's teaching school or whatever he did before the show. His voice is the constant, but I guarantee you that if some studio had signed him as an unknown that he'd never have sniffed the success he's having now. AI takes the raw materials and molds them into stars....that's the part I find fascinating to watch.
ajzepp Posted March 12, 2007 Posted March 12, 2007 That's one of the things I really like about the "Rock Star" shows. (The ones with Brooke Burke) On the last one nearly all of the artist vying to become the lead singer actually performed their own songs they had written in addition to the traditional songs. I think many of them are far more talented than anyone on Idol. Don't get me wrong, I like a lot of the Idol perfomers and from an entertainment aspect I enjoy the show. Do I vote? No, but I still enjoy watching it. Big deal. I like the Rock Star shows, too. I think one of the main differences is that those contestants are a LOT more seasoned than the Idol ones....generally speaking. Some of the Idol folks are in bands or whatever, but the Rock Star folks have a much greater stage presence and are much more clear on who they are and what they bring to the table as musicians. Just my opinion.
Recommended Posts