|
||||||||
Are the "more popular" "less talented"? |
![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 553
|
Are the "more popular" "less talented"?
I wanna know what you think. I've seen so many YouTube music videos with comments saying "x justin bieber fans" (referring to the number of dislikes).
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 53,677
|
Opinion of what constitutes talent is, like a sense of humour, subjective.
People tend to get far more snobby about it where music is concerned I think. |
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,408
|
Like all sociological questions, the answer is both yes and no.
Some incredibly popular bands like Metallica, Iron Maiden, AC/DC, Bon Jovi and Guns N' Roses are undoubtedly talented, and got to where they are today through that talent. And then on the other hand we have people like Cheryl Cole, who can't sing but is probably the most ogled woman in the UK. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,975
|
People tend to like someone who is incredibly beautiful and slightly talenetd more than an incredibly talented person who is slightly beautiful. Of course, they're are exceptions but I'm generalising.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 5,454
|
Justin Bieber is actually talented, it's just the fact he sings love songs at such a young age that makes him unpopular
He can play various instruments he just needs to use them in his music
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 53,677
|
Quote:
And then on the other hand we have people like Cheryl Cole, who can't sing but is probably the most ogled woman in the UK.
And no, i'm not a fan of hers either. |
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,905
|
I would say Cheryl and Britney are exceptions to the rule where popularity is irrelevant to talent, and even then they are/were good dancers and (even if it's incredibly mediocre) they can/could sing. You could argue that their ability to be popular without talent is, ironically, talent in itself.
The vast majority of popular acts are talented though, especially if we're talking long term popularity. With the likes of Justin Bieber, he is unfathomably overrated but he is talented...its just not translated into his career. |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,408
|
Quote:
See, statements like that just prove my point that it's subjective - Cheryl can sing.
And no, i'm not a fan of hers either. Put Cheryl Cole's music with someone who has the same voice, or even better, but isn't 'pretty' and it won't sell. I think anyone who doesn't agree with this is deluding themselves tbh. |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 53,677
|
Quote:
Cheryl is no more than an average vocalist.
Quote:
that's why she mimed on X-Factor.
She wouldn't be the only artist who does it - Kylie & Britney being two prime examples. Quote:
Put Cheryl Cole's music with someone who has the same voice, or even better, but isn't 'pretty' and it won't sell. I think anyone who doesn't agree with this is deluding themselves tbh.
But my point remains - an individual's view of talent is entirely subjective. You may say Britney Spears can't sing, but i'd say she's a talented dancer. You may say Norah Jones can't dance but i'd say she's a talented singer. If you like an artist, you'll invariably think they're talented. If you don't like someone, you'll probably think the opposite. |
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Kylie Minogue's Bedroom.
Posts: 4,354
|
I agree and I don't.
Lady GaGa has the voice, the writing skill, the performances and most importantly amazing tunes. Cheryl Cole, is attractive, has an okay voice, and has dull uninspired performances that are mimed. She is famous for being in girls alous and would have never been as big as she is now without x factor. Paloma Faith i think is almost on par with GaGa but isn't really getting the credibility she desevres. |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 105
|
Yes if someone can sing and present themselves on a stage in front of thousands of people, they have a talent.
But no-one can seriously suggest that Cheryl Cole is a huge talent. She doesn't write or arrange her own songs like Annie Lennox, doesn't innovate and doesn't command or inhabit a song like, say an Aretha Franklin. That's not being a music snob, that's just hard facts. There's always been a place for people like Cheryl Cole and I'd never say don't enjoy what they do. It's all a bit of fun. Cheryl can sing and dance and clearly goes down well with audiences. But she and some others mentioned in this thread are just not in the same league as what you'd call "proper "artists". (On an un-related note, though, I have to say though that Cheryl's recent comments about "ordinary people" really made me mad. She definitely came across as a snob herself then! |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Isle of Wight
Posts: 7,829
|
Quote:
So she can sing ..
No, the reason she mimed on X-Factor is that she had a dance routine to perform. As i'm sure you're very aware, performing a physically demanding dance routine would make it near impossible to sing live at the same time so miming is necessary. She wouldn't be the only artist who does it - Kylie & Britney being two prime examples. |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 105
|
Doesn't Kylie do whole concerts singing and dancing? Or does she mime too?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,594
|
Hmm, I think there is alot of "injustice".
However, none of the biggest selling artists have got where they are without having bags and bags of talent; Elvis, Madonna, Mariah, Whitney, Beatles, Streisand, AC/DC etc. |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 507
|
Quote:
Doesn't Kylie do whole concerts singing and dancing? Or does she mime too?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jyfw8GndhZU She doesn't really dance though. Madonna dances and sings live, but mimes a couple of tracks. |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,408
|
Quote:
You're joking surely? she/they have to mime because they can't sing and dance at the same time?
Muse and Iron Maiden have incredibly energetic stage shows, with two very talented vocalists (who could out-sing Cheryl any day) who don't need to resort to the pathetic miming we see from so many acts today. EDIT: Guns N' Roses as well. Axl is nearly 50 but has the energy of a 20 year old! |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Middesbrough (via Manchester)
Posts: 37,343
|
To echo others, there's no real answer here. There's some massive acts which are full of talent, then some massive acts which are pretty shit. To be big, though, it usually boils down to marketing these days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,386
|
Quote:
So she can sing ..
No, the reason she mimed on X-Factor is that she had a dance routine to perform. As i'm sure you're very aware, performing a physically demanding dance routine would make it near impossible to sing live at the same time so miming is necessary. And just to get to the OP's question, like what's been said it's a mixture of both. You've got your Britneys and Tweedys within the charts who get told what to mime, and then you have your Gagas who actually have some skill |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,332
|
Quote:
No, the reason she mimed on X-Factor is that she had a dance routine to perform. As i'm sure you're very aware, performing a physically demanding dance routine would make it near impossible to sing live at the same time so miming is necessary.
Surely, as a singer you are there to sing, and then you work out a dance routine that you can cope with, otherwise you just stand still and sing, as plenty do. She is, after all there to promote a song, not a dance routine. Alas the point with cole is that the song isn't strong enough to stand on its own, she needs a hyper ott dance routine with legions dancers, and pyro and therefore miming to back up what is, after all a pretty average song, |
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 53,677
|
Quote:
Weak excuse if I've ever heard one.
Quote:
Other acts and bands can have energetic live performances and still sing the actual tunes people came to see them do
Quote:
She is, after all there to promote a song, not a dance routine.
If you're a fan of that type of artist, you'll be expecting the dancers, the costumes and the pyro so that's what you'll get. And as far as Cheryl goes, that's what you got on X-Factor (not that I watched it..). The parallel I can draw here is strangely relevant because it's Dannii Minogue. In the early days of her career, she was very much like Cole and Spears. It was all about the fluffy pop songs with the synchronised dance routines. Then you get this on TOTP (crappy quality, but it's nearly 20 years old )http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwNk-Ux3CnQ Minimal physical activity or dancing from Dannii to give her the opportunity to sing the song live. And the other side of the fence - full dance routine and miming. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mswiH8CHyw |
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,386
|
Quote:
It's not an excuse - it's a physical fact. Tomorrow, nip out and run down the road and try and sing a song at the same time, and see if you can do it without sounding like someone on 40 fags a day.
Probably because they've previously recorded a live vocal and they mime to that. And so all those countless acts and bands that make rose up from a live environment are instead just faking it? That acts already mentioned on here such as Iron Maiden and Gun N Roses who are known for their energetic live performances have instead just performing to pre-recorded music all along? LMAO! Just because in some people's world of plastic Pop music 'singers' without the skill or talent to actually sing live decide instead to just mime whilst dancing around on stage to distract everyone from the fact they really can't hold a note doesn't mean the rest of the music world necessarily resorts to that too. If someone who claims to be a 'singer' (especially one who judges other singers on a TV show) has to resort to continuous miming then there is no real justification for their actions let alone be able to consider them as 'talented'. |
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: London
Posts: 2,539
|
She can manage semitones as well, not anything beyond that. Quote:
Cheryl is no more than an average vocalist. Monotone, no range and needs autotune to stay in tune - that's why she mimed on X-Factor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 53,677
|
I feel you're deliberately missing the point here. Quote:
No sane person would sing whilst 'running down the road'
Quote:
As said already you can sing live and work whatever dancing you wanted to do around it if one wanted. It's not impossible to sing while doing a 'dance routine' if people demand one,
If they had released a ballad as a single, i'm sure she may well have just sat on a chair and sung the song but they didn't - they released an uptempo dance number. Quote:
The need to constantly mime whilst needing all the dancers in the world and enough pyrotechnics to start a world war just points to someone who hasn't got the voice to cut it on the live stage
Quote:
That acts already mentioned on here such as Iron Maiden and Gun N Roses who are known for their energetic live performances have instead just performing to pre-recorded music all along? LMAO!
Quote:
If someone who claims to be a 'singer' (especially one who judges other singers on a TV show) has to resort to continuous miming then there is no real justification for their actions let alone be able to consider them as 'talented'.
A lot of the time there simply isn't the time available to get set up for one. Look at some of the P.A's on breakfast television - do you really think they'd have the time to set up for a live vocal?. Especially if the artist in question has a day's worth of promotion already booked?. Probably not, so it's more time-efficient to turn up, mime the song and get going. I understand this may not fit in with your perfect world of what a pop artist should or shouldn't do, but that, clearly in my opinion, is how the industry works nowadays. |
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,332
|
Quote:
You also have to take into account other factors when setting up for a live performance. Rehersals, sound checks e.t.c.. A lot of the time there simply isn't the time available to get set up for one. Look at some of the P.A's on breakfast television - do you really think they'd have the time to set up for a live vocal?. Especially if the artist in question has a day's worth of promotion already booked?. |
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 53,677
|
Quote:
Surely that just suggests a live performance isn't viable, and thats fine, after all the music video was invented for a reason.
I'm sure fans would like to be able to watch their favourite singer or group on TV, rather than see the same music video they've watched a hundred times on music television. But then I guess that's just the way that promotion goes nowadays - the artists who do show their faces and appear on the talk shows, the breakfast TV shows e.t.c., are usually the ones who get better sales and a higher chart position. |
|
|
![]() |
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 16:22.




)