That is a fair point. You were the one describing people as a bit simple just because they have the audacity to appear on a TV show you don't like.
Oh, come on, be honest, how many of the first auditionees have you and millions of XF viewers pointed at, laughed, and said that they were perhaps a bit ''tenpence to the shilling''?
Oh, come on, be honest, how many of the first auditionees have you and millions of XF viewers pointed at, laughed, and said that they were perhaps a bit ''tenpence to the shilling''?
Honestly I haven't. I have said that our cat sings better than one or two though.
If anything I think delusional is a good description of some of them.
I think the real talent is being able to sing, which some of the X Factor contestants can actually do. Plenty of acts over the years haven't been able to write or play an instrument, that's not an absolute necessity to being able to perform. Many different elements go into making different performers which appeal to different people. There is nothing wrong with performing a song created by someone else and there is nothing wrong with having a band play for you if you can't play yourself. That's what opera singers do.
I actually agree with you about the themes they really are ridiculous. But a group of people performing various songs in a style that suits them and getting judged in a constructive manner really isn't that awful an idea as a entertainment show. I don't think the contestants should be mentored by the judges whose desperation to win harms the show in my opinion. It should be about finding a great performer and it could be about that, but unfortunately the panto elements get the ratings.
I don't agree. Some people on the X Factor do have talent and saying they are bit simple is plain ignorant and snobby. I do agree that it's unfortunate that people like Wagner get this far through, it's not fair on the people who can actually sing.
Ok agree with your point about people being talented if they are "just" singers (though in the case of One Direction who are almost favs this is in question)........it's much more about the panto judges and format of the show which ruins it for me and everyone else whilst the judges carry on as if the show depends on them and their ludicrous "mentoring"...ie choosing a song.
I think the real talent is being able to sing, which some of the X Factor contestants can actually do. Plenty of acts over the years haven't been able to write or play an instrument, that's not an absolute necessity to being able to perform. Many different elements go into making different performers which appeal to different people. There is nothing wrong with performing a song created by someone else and there is nothing wrong with having a band play for you if you can't play yourself. That's what opera singers do.
I actually agree with you about the themes they really are ridiculous. But a group of people performing various songs in a style that suits them and getting judged in a constructive manner really isn't that awful an idea as a entertainment show. I don't think the contestants should be mentored by the judges whose desperation to win harms the show in my opinion. It should be about finding a great performer and it could be about that, but unfortunately the panto elements get the ratings.
I don't agree. Some people on the X Factor do have talent and saying they are bit simple is plain ignorant and snobby. I do agree that it's unfortunate that people like Wagner get this far through, it's not fair on the people who can actually sing.
Agreed that being able to sing is a talent. I can't and admire people who can. However simply being able to sing doesn't make you an artist or a star or whatever. It's being original, being able to interpret or inhabit a song or whatever. Take Aretha Franklin for example or Annie Lennox - great vocalists. Aretha (to the best of my knowledge) didn't write her own songs, Annie does. But they're both great singers. Most X Factor contestants (with a couple of exceptions) aren't anywhere near that league, despite being able to hold a tune.
I completely agree with your point about the judges' desperation to win and how it harms the show. Yes, it should be about finding a great performer, but the fighting between the judges is one of the main reasons (along with those outlined above) that I don't watch.
Agreed that being able to sing is a talent. I can't and admire people who can. However simply being able to sing doesn't make you an artist or a star or whatever. It's being original, being able to interpret or inhabit a song or whatever. Take Aretha Franklin for example or Annie Lennox - great vocalists. Aretha (to the best of my knowledge) didn't write her own songs, Annie does. But they're both great singers. Most X Factor contestants (with a couple of exceptions) aren't anywhere near that league, despite being able to hold a tune.
I completely agree with your point about the judges' desperation to win and how it harms the show. Yes, it should be about finding a great performer, but the fighting between the judges is one of the main reasons (along with those outlined above) that I don't watch.
I agree, I think for the X factor to find a performer of that caliber would be one in a million and I honestly don't think it would ever happen. But I do think they could find a performer such as Will Young who entertains people and who can continue to do so for a reasonable length of time.
But there again I think that there is a difference between technically good and entertainingly good. You can be technically excellent at something not just singing but, writing, acting whatever and still be boring as hell. Whereas somebody who's perhaps not as talented but has a certain spark that makes them more entertaining will probably be a lot more popular.
Hi Burning Bright, yes, using Aretha Franklin as an example was probably a bit OTT! Will Young's done alright for himself, hasn't he, even though he's a tad bland in his delivery. Leona Lewis and Alexandra Burke have good voices, imho.
But I agree that having a technically good voice isn't enough - having character and an ability to put across a mood or interpret the song is key. The person who started this thread off - Damon Albarn - certainly isn't a great singer. But he has got great character in his voice and really knows how to deliver Blur's songs in a way that a more technical singer couldn't manage.
Hhhhmmmm her sell buy date might be already be up or fast approaching - we don't hear much about her these days do we.The Burke's slightly extended 15 mins of fame will soon be up, as well, I would have thought.
His concert had a 5-star review in the Independent. He works with some of the most respected artists on the planet and he does a lot for promoting world music, not just a narrow amount of pop pap.
I guess you have no idea how interviews work. I'm sure the journalist asked him about the X-Factor, and then he gave his views.
He obviously doesn't. His media training fallen by the wayside, perhaps? As he would know fully well that answering in a particular manner about the biggest show on UK TV would be the 'story' that would run and run and get repeated in other papers/news/gossip sites. Though, seeing how no matter how 'serious' the famous musician they are still a celebrity and clearly not above attempting to get attention through whatever means. See: Elton John and Jamaroqui as recent examples.
But what do you want him to do if he's asked the question. Lie? Refuse to answer? He was being honest after being asked the question. I doubt he did it deliberately to get attention - someone with his standing and reputation in the music industry doesn't need to comment on a reality show to do that. He is respected for his opinion because of his body of work and his talent. He gets attention for the right reasons.
Elton is talented, no doubt about it, but he's cheapened his talent by becoming more "showbiz" over the past 20 years. Good to see he's started to slowly claw back his artistic reputation with his new album with Leon Russell.
I was lucky enough to be in the audience at the O2 on Tuesday night when Damon and the rest of the Gorillaz played. He had on stage a fab brass ensemble from Chicago, a group of musicians from Syria (I think it was - so sorry if not - so grumpy at some of the comments on here tonight it's clouding my typing), a string ensemble, two ex-members of the Clash... De La Soul... Bobby Womack... Neneh Cherry...
All respected musicians though. He is a musician - not a mouthpiece for a record company. As a frontman he is fantastic and deserves respect, even if you do not like his music. It's creative and has soul and thought behind it.
If you read the interview I do not think he is being mean about the people who go on the X-Factor at all, just stating the obvious really - they are there for money to be made from and that is rather sad.
I agree with what some are saying about rubbish music getting in the charts and that's been happening for a while now. I rarely listen to much chart stuff and instead prefer to buy stuff that my old favourites are putting out or hunt around for some quality new stuff.
The X Factor doesn't encourage people to be individual or innovative. I think most of them who go on there are looking for a quick route to fame and fortune, and they get it, if only for a while. Yes, the X Factor finalists can get in the charts and do very well for a while, but I still say that the show is just a bit of Saturday night entertainment and I don't think it needs to be taken anymore seriously than that.
Hhhhmmmm her sell buy date might be already be up or fast approaching - we don't hear much about her these days do we.The Burke's slightly extended 15 mins of fame will soon be up, as well, I would have thought.
I agree with what some are saying about rubbish music getting in the charts and that's been happening for a while now. I rarely listen to much chart stuff and instead prefer to buy stuff that my old favourites are putting out or hunt around for some quality new stuff.
The X Factor doesn't encourage people to be individual or innovative. I think most of them who go on there are looking for a quick route to fame and fortune, and they get it, if only for a while. Yes, the X Factor finalists can get in the charts and do very well for a while, but I still say that the show is just a bit of Saturday night entertainment and I don't think it needs to be taken anymore seriously than that.
Hi RosePetals, agree with everything you say, except that last sentence. Yes it is there for Saturday night entertainment and shouldn't be taken seriously, but its effect, as another poster said, has been to devalue the music scene and promote bland cover versions at the expense of innovation. That's undoubtedly had a knock-on effect on the music scene as a whole, and not for the better.
Will Young's moved more into theatre now. He acted in Mrs Henderson Presents and was quite good.
He was filming something down the road from where I work a few weeks ago apparently. I don't what it was for though.
I was lucky enough to be in the audience at the O2 on Tuesday night when Damon and the rest of the Gorillaz played. He had on stage a fab brass ensemble from Chicago, a group of musicians from Syria (I think it was - so sorry if not - so grumpy at some of the comments on here tonight it's clouding my typing), a string ensemble, two ex-members of the Clash... De La Soul... Bobby Womack... Neneh Cherry...
All respected musicians though. He is a musician - not a mouthpiece for a record company. As a frontman he is fantastic and deserves respect, even if you do not like his music. It's creative and has soul and thought behind it.
I've never been a massive fan, but I do like some of his work I don't have issue with him as an performer at all.
I'm actually not a great fan of X Factor either, but I find a lot of comments about the X Factor and Pop Idol before it quite churlish. People in the industry seem complain about it but then don't do anything practical about it. It's not like simon cowell has a team of ninjas waiting to attack on street corners if somebody shows an interest in something other than X Factor.
If they don't like the X Factor christmas number one, a few of them could get together and release a charity single. If they get the right group of people and the right song it could offer real competition to the X Factor.
Hi RosePetals, agree with everything you say, except that last sentence. Yes it is there for Saturday night entertainment and shouldn't be taken seriously, but its effect, as another poster said, has been to devalue the music scene and promote bland cover versions at the expense of innovation. That's undoubtedly had a knock-on effect on the music scene as a whole, and not for the better.
I think thats a problem with the entertainment industry as a whole and not just the music industry. What was the last really popular film out that wasn't a sequel? Or hit TV show? or book thinking about it?
Is it still the girl with a dragon tattoo still?
Innovation means taking risks and I don't think across the board the accountants seem keen on spending on something that may not make a profit. I don't know that the X factor can be blamed for that.
If they don't like the X Factor christmas number one, a few of them could get together and release a charity single. If they get the right group of people and the right song it could offer real competition to the X Factor.
I like that idea! Although I think Rage Against The Machine donated the proceeds from their surprise Christmas number 1 last year to charity (or at least I hope they did). Dreadful choice of song for the festive slot though... although I guess the band name was meant ironically! I would have supported another song (with proceeds going to charity) to go up against the X Factor winner for Christmas, but not RATM.
I think thats a problem with the entertainment industry as a whole and not just the music industry. What was the last really popular film out that wasn't a sequel? Or hit TV show? or book thinking about it?
Is it still the girl with a dragon tattoo still?
Innovation means taking risks and I don't think across the board the accountants seem keen on spending on something that may not make a profit. I don't know that the X factor can be blamed for that.
I don't blame it entirely for that, B-B. It's an interesting debate whether it's part of the cause, or merely a significant symptom. But you're right that the spirit of innovation in the arts, so exciting throughout the 60s and 70s has largely disappeared. I think it's partly because people began to realise how much money they could make from popular music. It stopped being subversive or revolutionary and became mainstream. Even indie became mainstream! So record companies (and yes film production companies too) are happy to peddle the same-old as long as it rakes in the cash!
Having said all that, there have been some wonderfully diverse albums released this year. I've bought tons of albums this year ranging from folk-rock to soul to indie to rock to pure pop. Excellent year for music, but sad that many of these great artists don't get the exposure or the sales they deserve. And no X Factor's not totally to blame for that either - downloads, re-releases, gaming, mult-channel TV, etc, etc, all play a part - but the show does have an effect as part of this bigger picture. As I say whether it's part cause or part symptom is for debate.
Interesting article on the BBC News site about BB's point re short-termism in the arts and accountants chasing quick hits rather than acts with longevity.
I like that idea! Although I think Rage Against The Machine donated the proceeds from their surprise Christmas number 1 last year to charity (or at least I hope they did). Dreadful choice of song for the festive slot though... although I guess the band name was meant ironically! I would have supported another song (with proceeds going to charity) to go up against the X Factor winner for Christmas, but not RATM.
Yes I believe they did, which was really good of them. I think they did a free concert too.
I didn't agree with the campaign last year mainly because it masked the fact that as far as I could tell the X Factor single didn't sell as well as expected.
People were buying multiple copies of both songs so it sold better than it possibly would have done and a large number of people were buying copies a song they had never heard of just to prove a point. A point that to me would have been better made by letting the X factor single sell less copies and start to fade naturally and hopefully this year we could have had a surprise artist at number one.
I did agree that the X Factor lot were getting cocky, but I don't know that a campaign really knocked that out of them, a more natural winner who won because they were more popular than the X Factor single would have been much better. Imo of course. :cool:
Comments
That is a fair point. You were the one describing people as a bit simple just because they have the audacity to appear on a TV show you don't like.
Oh, come on, be honest, how many of the first auditionees have you and millions of XF viewers pointed at, laughed, and said that they were perhaps a bit ''tenpence to the shilling''?
Honestly I haven't. I have said that our cat sings better than one or two though.
If anything I think delusional is a good description of some of them.
Of course you haven't......:D
I haven't! I really haven't!
Tone deaf, yes.
Ok agree with your point about people being talented if they are "just" singers (though in the case of One Direction who are almost favs this is in question)........it's much more about the panto judges and format of the show which ruins it for me and everyone else whilst the judges carry on as if the show depends on them and their ludicrous "mentoring"...ie choosing a song.
Agreed that being able to sing is a talent. I can't and admire people who can. However simply being able to sing doesn't make you an artist or a star or whatever. It's being original, being able to interpret or inhabit a song or whatever. Take Aretha Franklin for example or Annie Lennox - great vocalists. Aretha (to the best of my knowledge) didn't write her own songs, Annie does. But they're both great singers. Most X Factor contestants (with a couple of exceptions) aren't anywhere near that league, despite being able to hold a tune.
I completely agree with your point about the judges' desperation to win and how it harms the show. Yes, it should be about finding a great performer, but the fighting between the judges is one of the main reasons (along with those outlined above) that I don't watch.
I agree, I think for the X factor to find a performer of that caliber would be one in a million and I honestly don't think it would ever happen. But I do think they could find a performer such as Will Young who entertains people and who can continue to do so for a reasonable length of time.
But there again I think that there is a difference between technically good and entertainingly good. You can be technically excellent at something not just singing but, writing, acting whatever and still be boring as hell. Whereas somebody who's perhaps not as talented but has a certain spark that makes them more entertaining will probably be a lot more popular.
But I agree that having a technically good voice isn't enough - having character and an ability to put across a mood or interpret the song is key. The person who started this thread off - Damon Albarn - certainly isn't a great singer. But he has got great character in his voice and really knows how to deliver Blur's songs in a way that a more technical singer couldn't manage.
I've not read what he's said about it but I'm guessing he's proberbly right.
Hhhhmmmm her sell buy date might be already be up or fast approaching - we don't hear much about her these days do we.The Burke's slightly extended 15 mins of fame will soon be up, as well, I would have thought.
Will Young is from Pop Idol by the way - hasn't been $yco hallmarked.He's slowly fading out as well though http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_Young_discography
He obviously doesn't. His media training fallen by the wayside, perhaps? As he would know fully well that answering in a particular manner about the biggest show on UK TV would be the 'story' that would run and run and get repeated in other papers/news/gossip sites. Though, seeing how no matter how 'serious' the famous musician they are still a celebrity and clearly not above attempting to get attention through whatever means. See: Elton John and Jamaroqui as recent examples.
Elton is talented, no doubt about it, but he's cheapened his talent by becoming more "showbiz" over the past 20 years. Good to see he's started to slowly claw back his artistic reputation with his new album with Leon Russell.
All respected musicians though. He is a musician - not a mouthpiece for a record company. As a frontman he is fantastic and deserves respect, even if you do not like his music. It's creative and has soul and thought behind it.
If you read the interview I do not think he is being mean about the people who go on the X-Factor at all, just stating the obvious really - they are there for money to be made from and that is rather sad.
The X Factor doesn't encourage people to be individual or innovative. I think most of them who go on there are looking for a quick route to fame and fortune, and they get it, if only for a while. Yes, the X Factor finalists can get in the charts and do very well for a while, but I still say that the show is just a bit of Saturday night entertainment and I don't think it needs to be taken anymore seriously than that.
Will Young's moved more into theatre now. He acted in Mrs Henderson Presents and was quite good.
Hi RosePetals, agree with everything you say, except that last sentence. Yes it is there for Saturday night entertainment and shouldn't be taken seriously, but its effect, as another poster said, has been to devalue the music scene and promote bland cover versions at the expense of innovation. That's undoubtedly had a knock-on effect on the music scene as a whole, and not for the better.
He was filming something down the road from where I work a few weeks ago apparently. I don't what it was for though.
I've never been a massive fan, but I do like some of his work I don't have issue with him as an performer at all.
I'm actually not a great fan of X Factor either, but I find a lot of comments about the X Factor and Pop Idol before it quite churlish. People in the industry seem complain about it but then don't do anything practical about it. It's not like simon cowell has a team of ninjas waiting to attack on street corners if somebody shows an interest in something other than X Factor.
If they don't like the X Factor christmas number one, a few of them could get together and release a charity single. If they get the right group of people and the right song it could offer real competition to the X Factor.
I think thats a problem with the entertainment industry as a whole and not just the music industry. What was the last really popular film out that wasn't a sequel? Or hit TV show? or book thinking about it?
Is it still the girl with a dragon tattoo still?
Innovation means taking risks and I don't think across the board the accountants seem keen on spending on something that may not make a profit. I don't know that the X factor can be blamed for that.
I like that idea!
I don't blame it entirely for that, B-B. It's an interesting debate whether it's part of the cause, or merely a significant symptom. But you're right that the spirit of innovation in the arts, so exciting throughout the 60s and 70s has largely disappeared. I think it's partly because people began to realise how much money they could make from popular music. It stopped being subversive or revolutionary and became mainstream. Even indie became mainstream! So record companies (and yes film production companies too) are happy to peddle the same-old as long as it rakes in the cash!
Having said all that, there have been some wonderfully diverse albums released this year. I've bought tons of albums this year ranging from folk-rock to soul to indie to rock to pure pop. Excellent year for music, but sad that many of these great artists don't get the exposure or the sales they deserve. And no X Factor's not totally to blame for that either - downloads, re-releases, gaming, mult-channel TV, etc, etc, all play a part - but the show does have an effect as part of this bigger picture. As I say whether it's part cause or part symptom is for debate.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-11664781
Yes I believe they did, which was really good of them. I think they did a free concert too.
I didn't agree with the campaign last year mainly because it masked the fact that as far as I could tell the X Factor single didn't sell as well as expected.
People were buying multiple copies of both songs so it sold better than it possibly would have done and a large number of people were buying copies a song they had never heard of just to prove a point. A point that to me would have been better made by letting the X factor single sell less copies and start to fade naturally and hopefully this year we could have had a surprise artist at number one.
I did agree that the X Factor lot were getting cocky, but I don't know that a campaign really knocked that out of them, a more natural winner who won because they were more popular than the X Factor single would have been much better. Imo of course. :cool: