My latest beef.... WAIT! There's more.

[diogenes]

Feb 9, 2009, 1:03pm, squids wrote:Language is so hard to use in discussions like this. There're all sorts of public out there but if we're talking about what's successful in terms of marketing and sales, I'd say that the public that's being catered to aren't audiophiles with sophisticated tastes or education. Comparing the two, the general radio listener to the audiophile....I don't even know.......I've never been able to understand American Idol simply fo that reason. They tell you that ta be successful you must find your niche, excel at it along with marketing, song choice, production, about a zillion variables but then on AI, they promptly make them sing songs from other genres that clearly aren't suited fo them and that if they had a brain in their head, would refuse if left to their own devices (or education), they're asked to choose from a pool of songs from different generations, lots of things that an artist probably wouldn't do. Hence, ta me, it's really a show not about talent but about keeping an audience. Jennifer Hudson might be an example of why I think the show is flawed.The fact that Alison Krauss has been successful in so many genres indicates that she has a predilection fo pickin' up different styles and makin them sound native to her with a certain integrity and an impressive display of nuance. This is rare in a singer; I've tried most everything myself and have to use different voices to pull it off; she does not, so that makes her extremely rare. Judging by her and Plant's acknowledgements last night, some larger group recognizes that ability. I also realize that awards shows are political to a degree but again, her dignity and musicianship rise above the norm, at least to me. I digress, I apologize. I jes feel that on some level, the general public can recognize something genuine from something not but it's not the norm simply because I don't think they're getting that exposure to those different styles on commercial radio and therefo, not receiving the education to really understand what it takes to truly stand out in any field except the one they're most exposed to: Commercial radio.I'm sorry; I bet this didn't make any sense. This is very interesting, with regards to people being able to appreciate different things based on exposure.Take a look at heavy metal for instance. Most us have all been exposed to metal of some sort through all the various outlets that expose us to music. With only that brief exposure you were probably able to decide weather or not you liked metal and might like to investigate it further.If you chose not to investigate you may have no idea of all the different sub-genres and how to differentiate the good from the bad of that genre. It would probably all sound the same to you.So, the point is, if you can't tell Norwegian Black Metal from Florida Death Metal, what does that mean? What if you can't appreciate the finer points of well crafted grindcore? Do all those bands suck because you don't like them? I'll tell you what I think it means...nothing!Lots of us don't like lots of things, and not because were not exposed to them, maybe it's because we just don't like them.Musicians are a rare breed and the litany of excuses we come up with for our own perceived short coming's could fill a book. Apparently it's both comforting and popular to think we didn't make it because everyone else is stupid and has bad taste. (Not directed toward anyone in particular, just general observation)I don't buy that anymore. I used to. But I don't anymore. I don't even listen to pop, but I know how hard it is to write a great pop song, even it is performed by Miley Cyrus.To create something that resonates with a million people is an amazing thing, regardless of their age or level of education.

[squids]

Well, I think I said that; people who listen to commercial radio have heavy exposure to it and can appreciate what stands out (or more likely is in heavy rotation, it's hard ta say) versus some other genre so yes, a good pop song that's attached to a well-known name is more likely to make sales in the millions because it's right there in front of them the whole time. On the radio. What it takes to appeal to that large of an audience takes hiring an experienced PR firm, experienced writers/producers, etc, all of whom know exactly what they're doing and can produce. If not, they fired and onta the next guy who will.I ain't sayin' Bouncy didn't work hard, I'm sayin she's an entirely different breed of singer than etta or aretha. She's still had to put in her time from the time her daddy figured out what he wanted fo her to the time she figured out she wanted it fo herself. But they're not the same breed. At. All. Looking to find the same exquisite, indefinable thing that made etta or aretha who they are and not finding it in beyonce is a different subject altogether. I think work environment played a role but as Wade said, too late now; both etta/aretha were raised up to have to overcome what is perceived today by a lot of voice instructors as a hostile environment to a singer; loud bands/audiences, no in-ear monitoring, no proper voice coaching (although they both got a little, I believe) and both of them were mentored early and road-raised, not studio raised and they were already doin it by the time they were in their early 20s (although aretha mighta hit her stride a teensy bit lata, correct me if I'm wrong).I don't make much money in music not because I have excuses but because marketing hasn't been interesting to me, either yet or maybe neva. That doesn't mean I didn't work hard ta get where I am today, which HAS gotten me what I did want; the respect of my peers, here and elsewhere. But that's jes me and what I wanted. If I really was interested in making zillions I wouldn't be in school right now, training to do something else entirely. We're not all singularly gifted; lots of us are talented in many areas and choosing to pursue them as well as music is very healthy, I think.I don't know if everyone else is stupid or has bad taste. I think heavy rotation makes it easier to like a song because of exposure plus association with whatever emotional event is going on at the time in your life you hearin that song. PR firms are aware of this; psychologists are hired by them to help them understand that concept, to help a song become a hit. I think bill's point that it's being paid for now (in the millions) may play a part in this too.

[zircon]

Are you guys joking when you downplay how talented Beyonce is? She's not my favorite artist either, but please don't kid yourselves! She has an outstanding voice that is probably about one in a million. And what's this about her "not paying her dues" or some nonsense? Does anyone here even know her life story? How her father quit his day job to help her and her group (Destiny's Child) rehearse and hone their skills, which ultimately lended to her parents getting divorced? She put in the hard time that any great artist or musician does. Give her the respect she deserves.

[mazz]

I respect Beyonce and appreciate the dues she's paid (old musician's term: paying your dues), and there's no denying her talent. I just don't hear or feel it as much as I do with Etta or Aretha. That's just me and my tastes and opinions, nothing more, nothing less.Mazz

[squids]

It's the Vibes of Mazz.

[heinsite]

hey squids, that's a great line for a tune--or title--"I'm In Heavy Rotation..."--i wish...LOL... wh

[sgs4u]

Feb 9, 2009, 6:44pm, mazz wrote:I respect Beyonce and appreciate the dues she's paid (old musician's term: paying your dues), and there's no denying her talent. I just don't hear or feel it as much as I do with Etta or Aretha. That's just me and my tastes and opinions, nothing more, nothing less.MazzWe all have opinions yer right Mazz. Does any of them actually matter? Here's mine: Beyonce is wicked talented, she's paid her dues. Her legacy will stand the test of time.Aretha is wicked good, she's paid lots of dues too. No one will ever replace the Queen of Soul Etta is wicked good too, she might still be paying dues. Etta will leave a legacy, but mostly for that particular song. If Aretha had been chosen to sing At Last, would Etta have a problem with that? I find this argument moot, because all 3 of them are fabulous. Why compare a perfectly ripe banana to a cherry and an orange? How can any one of them be better than the other. Perhaps more appropriate for the demographic of a given project. Obviously, Etta would be the wrong choice to sing a romantic song to teenaged boys. How can any of them be less important than the other? What is the point of analyzing that? love music

[squids]

Feb 9, 2009, 9:52pm, sgs4u wrote:[quote author=mazz board=general thread=12073 post=119790 time=1234233849] How can any of them be less important than the other? What is the point of analyzing that? Because it's fun??

[diogenes]

This debate has been fun. And honestly, I could really care less about Beyonce.

[mazz]

Feb 9, 2009, 9:52pm, sgs4u wrote:Feb 9, 2009, 6:44pm, mazz wrote:I respect Beyonce and appreciate the dues she's paid (old musician's term: paying your dues), and there's no denying her talent. I just don't hear or feel it as much as I do with Etta or Aretha. That's just me and my tastes and opinions, nothing more, nothing less.MazzWe all have opinions yer right Mazz. Does any of them actually matter? Here's mine: Beyonce is wicked talented, she's paid her dues. Her legacy will stand the test of time.Aretha is wicked good, she's paid lots of dues too. No one will ever replace the Queen of Soul Etta is wicked good too, she might still be paying dues. Etta will leave a legacy, but mostly for that particular song. If Aretha had been chosen to sing At Last, would Etta have a problem with that? I find this argument moot, because all 3 of them are fabulous. Why compare a perfectly ripe banana to a cherry and an orange? How can any one of them be better than the other. Perhaps more appropriate for the demographic of a given project. Obviously, Etta would be the wrong choice to sing a romantic song to teenaged boys. How can any of them be less important than the other? What is the point of analyzing that? love music Of course, my opinion only really matters to me. If anyone else agrees, cool, if not, cool too.My analysis was of how each singer makes me feel and what depth of emotion and experience I perceive when listening to each.The analyzing and sharing serves to create connection and community, hopefully. And also to, hopefully, show that each person has a point of view that's valid to them and maybe someone else and maybe not, and there's really no empirically valid way to say "this is good music and this is not", because it's obviously an individual thing. We'll never get to the bottom of it. One group may say that music that sells is obviously superior because it appeals to a lot of people and others may say that great music is like great scotch, it is a refined, acquired taste and takes much more than casual listening to fully appreciate. And everything in between. All of it is valid or it's not, depending on who is making the judgement.We'll never get to the bottom of it, no matter how hard we try. And that's a beautiful thing.Rambling......... Mazz