what the hell happened to the talent in the music nowadays? (sing, band)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Talent is a pretty subjective term. Just the other day, we were talking to a man who told us about this "incredible" guy on "America's Got Talent" who played the piano, and so, my husband being a piano player, decided to look at the youtube video of him. My god, he was horrible. HORRIBLE, and yet the guy raved about how great he was.
The fact is, that most people are very uneducated and do not know what true talent is. Where I live, in the Branson area, people FLOCK, to see a performer named Shoji Tabuchi (maybe you have heard of him). He is a Japanese guy who plays a fiddle, and has a HUGE PRODUCTION SHOW. People love him, they rave about him, and he can't play his way out of a paper bag he is so mediocre.
The media hypes performers and the general population, being mainly ignorant, do not understand what is good and what is not. If a song is "catchy" they like it. Nobody considers that there is no TALENT involved. Just because someone can carry a tune or do a few dance steps, does not mean they are talented. You can teach a chimpanzee a dance routine.
Most people cannot tell the difference between someone who has no talent...
Adele is good but unfortunately, Im sure she'll end up being a one-hit-wonder here in the states. Her video won 3 awards last night but all for production and not her. Her one song was great, but I can guarantee she will not be around long or have a career as successful as say Amy Winehouse or even (bleck) Avril Lavinge.
Just talking US numbers...
Chasing Pavements (2008) went Platinum, nominated for 3 grammys including Record of the Year and Song of the Year. She won one for best new artist.
No it's not. It's all a matter of marketing, which gives you a couple of "personal preferences", like Republican and Democrat singers, choose one of the above. It's what the big recording companies can dish out for the largest profit, by selling the image of people who may or many not have musical talent. Anybody an sing well enough to be digitally enhanced.
If a performer can be visually sold as a charismatic persona, his/her voice can be digitally laid into a computer-generated track. And then you have "music", and the company that is foisting it off on us is so huge that there is no competition.
You know what kills me? There is an entire planet out there, of highly varied musical cultures. If you want something that is not American mainstream, you have ONE alternative genre: "Worldbeat" Worldbeat is exactly the same old arrangements with exactly the same old drum/electronic beat, digitally mixed in Los Angeles or maybe exotic London, but with words sung in a foreign language by a singer wearing an ethnic costume on the CD cover.
If you search long enough, you can still uncover something that's not in the hammerlock of the Sony/BMI juggernaut:
No it's not. It's all a matter of marketing. It's what the big recording companies can dish out for the largest profit, by selling the image of people who may or many not have musical talent. Anybody an sing well enough to be digitally enhanced.
It is. The consumer buys the music. If they didn't like it, they wouldn't buy it and thus the artist would fail; labels would follow suit. Just because you don't like the music doesn't mean someone else doesn't. This is why this music is bought.
It is all based on personal taste.
If was based on your analysis, Pia Tiscano would have taken off. Jimmy Iovine (i.e. Interscope Records) pumped time and promotion in lauching her and she didn't take off. Sex supposely sells yet her being attractive in skimpy dresses didn't help her. Where's Tila Tequila again... Digitally enhanced? Check. Slutty clothing? Check. Contract with these labels at any point? No.
Old people. Gotta love them. It's all a matter of personal preference. It's ironic really, since it seems that every older generation complained about anything that is different from what they were used to hearing to. Heck, people at one point we saying that jazz was garbage. Again, all about personal preference. I like Lady Gaga, Bruno Mars, Adele, Eminem, and the likes.
Yes and hopefully you love the wisdom and experience that went before you. Music is also about perception. When you are less experienced in life, you perceive your discoveries, modern music in this case, as innovation, the freshest available. I was the same way back in my teens to 40's. But that does'nt mean it is the best possible.
There is great music out there. But none of that real talent seems to make it onto radio these days. Sure, there are some catchy tunes and witty lyrics. But the production lacks human creativity. Machines cannot synthesize talent or creativity. What is taking place is emulation and immitation. So we have recycled licks, sampled chords and riffs that accompany pseudo 'deep' lyrics that mean nothing that hasnt already been sung.
If a performer can be visually sold as a charismatic persona, his/her voice can be digitally laid into a computer-generated track. And then you have "music", and the company that is foisting it off on us is so huge that there is no competition.
If you thunk this is has somehow happened recently, then you are mistaking. That is how the likes of Michael Jackson and Madonna became as big as they did.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Opinionated
Yes and hopefully you love the wisdom and experience that went before you. Music is also about perception. When you are less experienced in life, you perceive your discoveries, modern music in this case, as innovation, the freshest available. I was the same way back in my teens to 40's. But that does'nt mean it is the best possible.
There is great music out there. But none of that real talent seems to make it onto radio these days. Sure, there are some catchy tunes and witty lyrics. But the production lacks human creativity. Machines cannot synthesize talent or creativity. What is taking place is emulation and immitation. So we have recycled licks, sampled chords and riffs that accompany pseudo 'deep' lyrics that mean nothing that hasnt already been sung.
Oh, I'm not saying that the current state of music is the best. It just gets tiresome to see an older generation complain about the general state of music today. A lot of them just base that notion of mainstream music, and last time I recalled, mainstream isn't where all the music is at.
Again, it's very ironic. Weren't old people complaining about The Beatles, Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, and Madonna amongst others?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $53,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
