I ask this as I have seens so many post about "I want to see what they are like doing a slow/fast rocky/ballad/pop song".

Then as soon as someone attempts something outside of their normal set and it goes less than absolutely prefect, they are jumped on and savaged by many on here.

So why does the winning act have to be and all-rounder when as soon as they start recording, they will be doing what is correct and right for them.

Acts that you may not like, but who have made millions by sticking to what they are good at:

Westlife - a whole career based on over-the-top love songs.
Barry Manilow - Much the same!
Guns 'n' Roses - Rock with a voice that can break concrete.
and so so so many more!

Even the greatest artists of all-time when doing their version of an old song, have done just that: THEIR VERSION.
I.E. The original version didn't suit them!

So if it's good enough for the greatest artists of all-time, then why do the X-Factor contestants HAVE TO be all-rounders?

David Copperfield is an Illusionist - rarely does he do just do an Escapology trick or hypnotise people. He sticks to what he does best.



Your thoughts...

IMO, the winner needn't be a good all-rounder, as long as they're outstanding at what they *do* do. Acts like Andy and Journey South can do a wide variety of songs, and they're all the better for it, but another act, say Nicholas, who has to stick to one genre equally deserves to win as long as they're great at their particular genre (and of course have the X Factor).

Yeah! the rounder the better( sorry I couldn't resist)

I think Brenda's version of Midnight Train To Georgia is a great example of my impression of what the X-Factor is about, she made that song her own, as opposed to Andy's version of Unforgetable... which wasn't very good imo.

Yep I agree with you on this one. I am less interested in seeing them try different stuff, and more interested in seeing them try something contemporary, and in their own chosen field to see how they would fit into today's market. Credit to Philip on Saturday - what he chose to do didn't work, but at least he went with what he wanted to ultimately do - the public didn't like it and that's fair enough.

As has been discussed on here many times before, its no good them all singing safe MOR records on a Saturday night, then releasing an album and it having no resemblance to what they won singing on the Saturday night.

If Shayne is going to be doing Robbie type pop then let's see him doing it.

If Nicholas is going to go along the lines of Lemar then let's see him doing that.

If this happens then maybe the one who wins might actually have a career.

I do think that being able to carry off a wide-range of musical styles is a bonus, but not necessarily essential. Many acts have had very successful careers by using the same formula over and over again (Coldplay, Sterophonics, Travis, David Gray). However, I do prefer to listen to an artist who is prepared to experiment and try something new - for example, David Bowie, The Kinks, REM.

In the context of the X Factor, showing you can do well with a variety of different material does tend to impress the audience (hence the success of G4 last year), but given that Steve won by singing pretty much the same old same old every week, many people are clearly happy if an act finds his niche and sticks to it.

'Does the winner have to be an all-rounder?'

Do you mean like Andrew 'Freddie' Flintoff?

There's only one Freddie Flintoff.....

...but apparently, he puts it All-round!

There are two ways in which a more rounded performer has an advantage over a one-trick pony (assuming broadly equal basic talent). One is the latter nmay end up boring the audience over the course of the show - if they reach the final that's over 10 performances, and if every song is not merely the same genre but the same tempo, sub-genre and theme, even their fans are going to lose some of teh excitement. The other is that when it comes to the last few rounds, having sung in several genres/styles does broaden the pool of potential voters for that singer.