|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
75.39.16.143
In Reply to: RE: I'm giving props to Lady Gaga... posted by RGA on September 06, 2014 at 23:21:37
IMHO
Follow Ups:
There's often much more to being a pop star than just one's ability to sing or write songs. Matter of fact I would suggest that is what is wrong with the music industry. Some of course would argue that is exactly what is right with it.
Give me rhythm or give me death!
Many pop singers can't even sing on key. I don't care so much about the entertainment factor. Even rap, the new minstrel show, provides entertainment to those so inclined to waste their time.
Sure but I've met people who could sing circles around her who will at best achieve a very low level of local celebrity/fame.In the big picture she's not a real good singer (don't deny she can sing) - it's her character that brings her fame - most certainly she's risen far beyond her ability to sing.
It's not like the best singing talent rises to the top of the pop charts. If it ever was like that, it was long before I came aware, in the mid 60s.
She's a celebrity who sings. IMO she's as interesting as watching some young actor/actress do gymnastics. I mean for crying out loud MJ does underware commercials. But then again it is what the public adores....
Give me rhythm or give me death!
Edits: 09/08/14 09/08/14 09/08/14
The problem is rock and pop really aren't about the quality of the singer's voice. Or for that matter how well they play instruments.
Even American Idol has said this to contestants who may have a terrific voice but the wrong image to be able to succeed as a pop artist. Your voice would have to be so above and beyond the rest to be able to make it. The only one I can think of that managed a career by looking like a troll in the world of pop from that show was Kurt Nilsen linked below with Willie Nelson in a duet. You have to be buying the guy for his voice. (sorry Kurt).
You're correct that there are better talents who go under the radar because they don't have the money or the "ins" to have a leg up on their career. Madonna basically brought Burlesque from France into her acts and created a fashion statement. On the other hand she's still going for over 35 years so it's not just about sex appeal and costumes and stunts.
It's about putting out a better pop song that stays in people's heads longer. It's pretty tough not to be at clubs and not hear the song Holiday played - even 30 years on. Similar to AC/DC's Thunderstruck. Can anyone tell me that Brian Johnson is a great vocalist. The guy basically screams every lyric as if his head is about to explode. Yet I can listen to and darn well like AC/DC for whatever strange reason.
More important than a good voice is perhaps a unique voice - like Ellie Goulding or Sade or Cher or Celine Dion. You know instantly who it is - and in a way that may be more important than some largely subjective evaluation of their vocal range.
For instance even the below link - Kurt Nilsen is a terrific singer vocally but does he stand out - is it unique. Willie Nelson arguably isn't remotely in the same league but yet you know his voice - it stands out from the "pleasant" more. Same for a guy like Johnny Cash. Ellie Goulding is a prime example - her voice is likely to be a love it or hate kind of thing.
In a nutshell - I'd much rather hear an ok singer who sounds like they give a shit about the song than some old pro displaying his talent going through the motions. Not much more boring than listening to some hyper-talent show casing his/her abilities. I think this has something to do with why I can't appreciate much jazz (or the post 1971 or so Rolling Stones).
Give me rhythm or give me death!
Edits: 09/09/14
For instance, I DVR SNL and fast forward through the musical acts which bore me terribly. IMHO, Gaga has a better voice than most singers in this crap music industry. YMMV.
SNL live musical guest usually are worth of FFing through and if you say Lady GaGa has a better voice than most pop rock singers I agree with you.
Still she can't sing that well and for the most part almost everything about her is ugly. I mean if you want to define pop music as the "celebrities" that usually populate Billboard charts or SNL guest list then yea I agree it's a wretched industry. I haven't done that since the mid-70s and I find tons of great music by new artists these days (most of it not very popular).
Didn't Tony Bennett duet with that tattoed drug addict before she died too? Yea she had a better than most voice too. I'm glad Tony has found a way to keep himself in the press.
Give me rhythm or give me death!
Like most modern pop singers, without Auto-Tune, she'd be nothing.
Lady Gaga does have talent..... But as an actress and maybe a choreographer..... I'll say it was those talents that got her where she is today. She'd probably do well on Broadway or in Hollywood.
Could just be she considers "pop" music to be beneath her musical "skill
set", (which in reality should be beneath anyone who has even the slightest amt of musical sensitivity)
Unfortunately, what the general populace will "accept" as being "viably entertaining" dictates what the rest of us are stuck with.
As I see it we have 2 choices. We can either attempt to raise the "musical expectations" bar within whatever circles we can or stay within our Old School mentallities & shake our heads at "the stuff that people will listen to"
If there was ever a subject that we could all benefit from with some "Brainstorming" on these forums this would be it! (or we could shut our YAPs & adopt the "modern day edited version" of Popeye's Philosophy of "It am what it am")(It's pretty sad when a cartoon saying written well over half a century ago becomes a relevant statement)
regards,-reub
Edits: 09/08/14
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: