Members Lee Flier Posted March 31, 2008 Members Share Posted March 31, 2008 Weird to see discussions that are 10X deeper than the show being discussed! Why do you think I hang out on forums instead of watching TV? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lee Flier Posted March 31, 2008 Members Share Posted March 31, 2008 The lack of interest on sites like this probably has more to do with no real compelling musical talent to get people like us excited. Last year, I think Melinda Doolitle got sites like this riled up because she had a phenomenal voice. Too bad she lacked a personality. But musicians were hopping up and down after her every masterful performance, and debated Jordan vs. Melinda like Mac vs. PC. But who is there now for us to get excited about? No wonder you speculate it's beneath the musicians you revere. AI is just not that interesting musically. Yeah, and I don't see how it could be. Like you say, I don't see much relationship between "AI, the TV show" and "a means of breaking legit talent." But until 24 returns to the air, what other violent but good shows are out there to watch? LOL... I don't know, cuz see, I hardly ever watch TV. If I'm not playing music or engineering it or programming or writing, I'm hanging with my friends or hanging out on the Internet. Doesn't leave a whole lot of room for TV. And when I do watch, it's usually baseball games, home decorating shows or Discovery Channel type stuff... probably not too exciting to you, being a cat. HC seems to fill the "violent but good" niche quite well though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators MrKnobs Posted March 31, 2008 Moderators Share Posted March 31, 2008 Weird to see discussions that are 10X deeper than the show being discussed! I did MY best to keep the level of discussion shallow. Terry D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members nice keetee Posted March 31, 2008 Members Share Posted March 31, 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members nice keetee Posted March 31, 2008 Members Share Posted March 31, 2008 Is this the American Idol or Artificial Intellagents Thread? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Duddits Posted April 1, 2008 Members Share Posted April 1, 2008 LOL ... yeah, that was exactly the kind of thing I didn't want to do, although it certainly seemed I had an open invitation to do it. I also had numerous opportunities to, for example, join cutesy little girl-bands that were sure to be famous (and some were), and again one could argue that the "publicity" was worth doing it. But again, I didn't think it was. I'm very glad I never went on tour and made records with a bunch of people I didn't care about, who were thrown together by some lecherous producer, and played music I didn't care about, and ended up forever typecast as that chick who was in that lame girl band for 15 minutes. That isn't why I do this, and never has been. But then, I'm a little odd. I don't doubt you for a second! In a good way! But I bet the draw of fame and fortune lures more aspiring musicians to the flame of publicity, no matter how much it burns, than care to admit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Duddits Posted April 1, 2008 Members Share Posted April 1, 2008 LOL... I don't know, cuz see, I hardly ever watch TV. If I'm not playing music or engineering it or programming or writing, I'm hanging with my friends or hanging out on the Internet. Doesn't leave a whole lot of room for TV. And when I do watch, it's usually baseball games, home decorating shows or Discovery Channel type stuff... probably not too exciting to you, being a cat. HC seems to fill the "violent but good" niche quite well though. Not all that big on home decorating shows, but I do check out The Deadliest Catch on Discovery from time to time (mmmmm seafood), and of course there's Animal Planet for the hotties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members WSLer Posted April 4, 2008 Members Share Posted April 4, 2008 I see what you're saying about AI catering to an increasingly irrelevant model, but I think its complete lack of relevance goes way deeper than what you're suggesting, and in that sense it was just as irrelevant the day it started as it is today. Whether the ratings have dropped because the public is finally realizing this, I couldn't say. I'm more inclined to think ratings have dropped just because people eventually tire of the latest TV fad and move on to something else. Just like Survivor or any of those other lame shows, eventually people tire of the same concept and it becomes played out. That's because nobody of that calibre would ever agree to appear on a show like AI, and more than likely wouldn't have even as kids. Therein lies its total irrelevance. Survivor has been on for a cumulative total of 16 seasons, which is quite a long time in the tv business. As for your comments about no one of that calibre agreeing to appear on the show, Dolly Parton was on just the other night and she ranks right up there with Buddy Holly and John Lennon as far as music icons go. How many other music acts have an entire theme park named after them? Your snide hipster doofus act was boring and tiresome and played out 15 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lee Flier Posted April 4, 2008 Members Share Posted April 4, 2008 As for your comments about no one of that calibre agreeing to appear on the show, Dolly Parton was on just the other night and she ranks right up there with Buddy Holly and John Lennon as far as music icons go. I agree that she ranks right up there... but really? She was on American Idol as a contestant? Your snide hipster doofus act was boring and tiresome and played out 15 years ago. WTF? I gave a sincere opinion, whether or not you like or agree with it, and I certainly don't have any "snide hipster" aspirations... that's a good one! Are you saying only a snide hipster doofus wouldn't like American Idol? What does your comment even mean? :poke: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members WSLer Posted April 5, 2008 Members Share Posted April 5, 2008 I agree that she ranks right up there... but really? She was on American Idol as a contestant? No, they were doing a Dolly Parton themed night or somesuch and she performed. And in today's entertainment world it's fair to say that Kelly Clarkson and Kerry Underwood are icons in their respective musical genres. I'm not saying they are on the same level as John Lennon or Buddy Holly, they can rightly be called icons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators MrKnobs Posted April 5, 2008 Moderators Share Posted April 5, 2008 As for your comments about no one of that calibre agreeing to appear on the show, Dolly Parton was on just the other night and she ranks right up there with Buddy Holly and John Lennon as far as music icons go. How many other music acts have an entire theme park named after them? Ah yes, Dollywood. Doesn't Dolly own that park? Terry D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Kerouac Posted April 6, 2008 Members Share Posted April 6, 2008 I just want to give Craig props for mentioning one of my idols, "Mr." Ani DiFranco. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sjepstein Posted April 7, 2008 Members Share Posted April 7, 2008 That's because nobody of that calibre would ever agree to appear on a show like AI, and more than likely wouldn't have even as kids. Therein lies its total irrelevance. So, I had had a theory about this--about what rubbed me a bit the wrong way about AI (though I do watch it, and appreciate that they're not dissing instrument playing this season...). It's this: There seem to me to be two strains/traditions in American popular music. One is the "studio system" that AI plays to--going back to the teen idols, the packaged performers singing songs written by studio employees, etc. This is, what you might say, singer as studio employee. The other strain, going back to, for example, Buddy Holly, is what you might call "musical entrepreneurship:" Musician/band as a sole proprietor with a product that the studio buys and distributes. Now, personally, I am perfectly willing to make an aesthetic judgment--I prefer the latter. But, on the other hand, I'm not making a moral judgment... Scott Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lee Flier Posted April 7, 2008 Members Share Posted April 7, 2008 Now, personally, I am perfectly willing to make an aesthetic judgment--I prefer the latter. But, on the other hand, I'm not making a moral judgment... Not that it would matter if you did - it wouldn't change anything. But I'm really not making a moral judgement either, but definitely an aesthetic one: I don't like watching the show personally and I don't think it fosters the kind of talent I want to see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Alndln2 Posted April 7, 2008 Members Share Posted April 7, 2008 It will be interesting to see if, whether in the years ahead, American Idol will be able to adapt and change to the new model of "stardom." I give the show another year with even worse ratings before tanking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rasputin1963 Posted April 7, 2008 Members Share Posted April 7, 2008 To try to put my finger on what I dislike about AI it has to be the glib "everybody's a star" mentality. [We sure don't say that "everybody's a poet laureate!" or "everybody's a gene splicer!"] People at home can imagine that they are a scant one-degree-of-separation from the AI singer-du-jour... "Hey! I can do THAT!" Me, I like to be entertained by artists for whom I can say, "Never in a million years, not in f***ing aeons could I sound as fine as that, or play as well as that, or as distinctively as that." My other little issue is my conviction that the best artists come out of some deeper reservoir of ethnic, cultural and political significance. They don't just nakedly stand onstage for themselves, to preen and be admired. Rather they are voiceboxes for some larger corpus of human striving, endeavour, identity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted April 7, 2008 Author Members Share Posted April 7, 2008 Well, I gotta say, to some extent everybody is a star in their own way. Not "star" as in ready for prime time, but star as in someone whose friends like 'em. But that CERTAINLY doesn't mean they qualify to be a big deal on AI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted April 24, 2008 Author Members Share Posted April 24, 2008 Interesting comments from Bob Lefsetz on AI. (Copyright 2008 by Robert Scott Lefsetz and reprinted with the express written consent of the author.) I saw Paul Stanley in the audience of "American Idol". What can I say, Felice is addicted, I heard the rumble from afar and when I went to retrieve her from the bedroom, I got hooked by the show too. I guess it's just instinct, we're all judges, we want to evaluate talent...and just maybe we want to be a member of the club. "American Idol" has the highest ratings of any weekly series, it's the most talked about show, its stars go on to have hit records... Well, not so much anymore. Sure, Kelly Clarkson had some hits, but she was the first. And "Since U Been Gone" was a product of the Max Martin machine. Carrie Underwood is a star in the country world, she's the beneficiary of the best material in Nash Vegas... Wait a minute here... Is this two-dimensional stardom, are these performers no more than cardboard? The classic rockers were built on their own material. There were no song doctors. It was directly from their heart to yours. And this has delivered audiences in some cases forty years after their debut. If you're just singing someone else's song, you're driving the BMW. Someone else can get inside and take the wheel instantly. Which is what happens in the evanescent pop world. Everybody today may not be a one hit wonder, but few have more than two or three hit tracks, and almost none of these acts can do respectable live business. And we learned that TV exposure shortens careers. That was the lesson of MTV. If you're on, you're in everybody's household for a brief window, then you're discarded like a candy wrapper, the chocolate having been savored for an instant and then forgotten. And what about the runners-up? Sure, Daughtry has had hits. Interesting that he's a rocker, when so many of the winners are diva-wannabes... But can you name the other contestants who almost won? How about some of those who DID win, like Fantasia and Ruben Studdard? It's a house of cards. A TV show. And TV is the number one mass medium in the history of the world. It can sell anything. Just ask Procter & Gamble. But even TV is faltering, in this permission marketing, multi-channel, Internet world. In other words, are we just mesmerized that ANYTHING can get this many eyeballs, this much traction in today's diverse cultural landscape? It's not like these are artists. Hell, Carly Hennessy/Smithson already failed once. These are voices, doing the best karaoke job of all time. And in many cases, not that good. Carly Smithson murdered "Superstar" on Tuesday night. I remember when I heard the original on the radio in the spring of 1970, before Webber and Rice went all Broadway on us, when they still employed rock singers and had credibility. The track was joyous, infectious. Carly evidenced none of these attractions. There was no CONTEXT! Simon is a star. You just wait to hear what he says. Paula rivets you because you're waiting to see if she implodes on camera. Randy is sacrificing what credibility he had for a paycheck. But it's not like Paula and Randy can have any success off this show. No one cares. It's just about the show. Simon's smart enough to know it's not about his fame, it's about the dough. That TV delivers momentary record sales, that he can profit from. Is this the game you're in? Earning a golden ticket to instant fame that will be taken away from you on your way to the 7-11, transforming you from a customer to an employee? If you want to have a long career, write your own material. Be different, not the same. And don't go on television, it will shorten your tenure. If you can't write, if you've got nothing to say, try out for "American Idol". You might get a shot at momentary fame, but that's all it is, momentary. As for Mr. Stanley... The people watching are not KISS fans, this is not bringing in dollars to your enterprise. People lose sight of the truth. The truth is that "American Idol" has got nothing to do with rock and roll, nothing to do with careers. Anybody can get on television, haven't you watched "Survivor", or MTV or VH1? The PROGRAM is the star, not the talent. Never forget this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dreabfly Posted April 24, 2008 Members Share Posted April 24, 2008 Great editorial. And so true. The model is dead. In all fairness, though, TV ratings are sucking this year for everyone, so the dip can't just be attributed to people not connecting to the show. The writer's strike has decimated broadcast this year. But, for my own selfish reasons, I secretly hope you're right. Music reality shows should be better than this considering how many great musicians are on the planet. Pop stars of the past used to actually BE EXTRAORDINARY. Can you imagine Whitney Houston or Michael Jackson having had to compete with Idol's dismal performances. Such a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members GVDub Posted April 25, 2008 Members Share Posted April 25, 2008 And I'm more than a little confused by the allegation that pops up a number of times in this thread that "Cover Songs" = "No Soul". Sam & Dave covering Hayes' and Porter's "When Something Is Wrong With My Baby" or Frankie Miller's cover of Lennon's "Jealous Guy" are two of the most soulful recordings i can think of. And there are hundreds of other examples of amazingly soulful versions of songs that were recorded by people who didn't write them. A performer's ability to get to the heart of a song has little to do with whether they wrote it. Go listen to Elvis Costello's cover version of the Bachrach/David tune, "I Just Don't Know What To Do With Myself" and tell me he didn't connect with the song. Not that I think that Idol is anything other than packaged pablum, but let's not blame lack of soul on cover tunes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members kurdy Posted April 25, 2008 Members Share Posted April 25, 2008 And I'm more than a little confused by the allegation that pops up a number of times in this thread that "Cover Songs" = "No Soul". Sam & Dave covering Hayes' and Porter's "When Something Is Wrong With My Baby" or Frankie Miller's cover of Lennon's "Jealous Guy" are two of the most soulful recordings i can think of. And there are hundreds of other examples of amazingly soulful versions of songs that were recorded by people who didn't write them. A performer's ability to get to the heart of a song has little to do with whether they wrote it. Go listen to Elvis Costello's cover version of the Bachrach/David tune, "I Just Don't Know What To Do With Myself" and tell me he didn't connect with the song. Not that I think that Idol is anything other than packaged pablum, but let's not blame lack of soul on cover tunes. Yes, if an artist can bring something unique to a song, it isn't soulless. I think part of the problem sitting through American Idol is that unlike artists of the past who made songs famous that weren't previously very well-known, or did their own unique version that could stand on its own, American Idol contestants mostly do covers that have already been done to death, usually falling short of the originals. Although, I know this is necessary for the show to keep a large audience who likes familiarity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.