american idol

[kmart]

And there are some DAMN good players on that stage.

 

Now THERE'S where the real talent on the show is.

Some GREAT players in the band (not sure how many have rotated in & out over the years, but the core bunch in what I'd see the first few seasons...smoking tight & highly capable band.

[Vito Corleone]

RE: The final 12 are selected by popular vote/the public selects who gets voted out each week and what's Democratic: It's public vote AND a number of other factors, including the people who run the show, deciding all of it. Are you really under the impression that the public, and the public alone, decides all of the above and who wins AI? If so, I've got a bridge in Brooklyn, some land off the tip of Florida, a couple magic beans and a whole lot more to sell you. Seriously? You really believe that's all decided by the public only? Wow.

Every season, of course, the cry goes out that the voting is somehow rigged. It's CERTAINLY rigged to this degree:

1) the finalists chosen by the judges are chosen with a big eye towards who will be "good TV" and NOT just who are the best singers. There's always a couple of 'fan favorite' types who certainly aren't among the best singers. But they are fun to watch and help keep the ratings up.

2) I believe they at least claim that the order-of-who-sings is chosen randomly each week. Yet, somehow the best singers almost ALWAYS seem to 'draw' the last couple of spots every week. In the early weeks when the show is 2 hours long, you can almost guarantee the singers who went first will end up in the bottom 3. You can't even remember what they did 2 hours later.

But I have no reason to believe the actual voting is rigged. For one, if it ever came out that it was, that would be a MAJOR scandal. And how long could they keep something like that under wraps? And, most importantly, there's no REASON to rig it. The American people are perfectly capable of creating enough silly 'drama' with the results. There'd be enough controversy and "good TV" either way. Maybe more so if they don't. Would the producers have REALLY bumped Chris Daughtry to finish 4th so Taylor Hicks could win?

[vanlatte]

 

1) the finalists chosen by the judges are chosen with a big eye towards who will be "good TV" and NOT just who are the best singers. There's always a couple of 'fan favorite' types who certainly aren't among the best singers. But they are fun to watch and help keep the ratings up.

 

 

It amazes me how many people don't understand this concept. And it really is nothing new, raw ability/talent does not always equal entertainment value, it never has and never will.

 

In that vein I sort of agree with there not being any great singers coming from AI. Sort of....because some of them are just plain fantastic, even if I may not care for the style. To just write the whole thing off because "the singers are not good enough" is not even using the correct criteria for what is considered good.

[Steadfastly]

 

It amazes me how many people don't understand this concept. And it really is nothing new, raw ability/talent does not always equal entertainment value, it never has and never will. In that vein I sort of agree with there not being any great singers coming from AI. Sort of....because some of them are just plain fantastic, even if I may not care for the style. To just write the whole thing off because "the singers are not good enough" is not even using the correct criteria for what is considered good.

 

 

If there is little or no entertainment value, then why waste your time in watching it? You can find better entertainment on YouTube.

[MikeyParent]

Sadly he turned out to be a theatrical freak show on wheels but Adam Lambert has one of the best voices to ever be on the show IMO. Crazy effortless range.

[BlueStrat]

1) Baloney right back at you. 2) Yes, I have watched in limited doses. Not anymore though, as it has zero appeal to me. 3) RE: The final 12 are selected by popular vote/the public selects who gets voted out each week and what's Democratic: It's public vote AND a number of other factors, including the people who run the show, deciding all of it. Are you really under the impression that the public, and the public alone, decides all of the above and who wins AI? If so, I've got a bridge in Brooklyn, some land off the tip of Florida, a couple magic beans and a whole lot more to sell you. Seriously? You really believe that's all decided by the public only? Wow. BTW- I see what you're trying to do with that picture of Rubben Studdard. Nice try, massive fail. Big/husky R&B singer. Yeah, that's a REAL new one, isn't it? He. Fit. The (In his case, "A" suit). Suit. Period.

 

The point is (since you can't seem to get it) is not that Ruben Studdard wears a suit. It's that you claimed looks had more to do with winning than talent. But people who aren't pretty have won, at least twice. The fail is on your end.

 

But then, I guess it's all a conspiracy to you, it simply has to be, since you're wed to the idea that no great singer can possibly come out of AI.

[GCDEF]

Every season, of course, the cry goes out that the voting is somehow rigged. It's CERTAINLY rigged to this degree: 1) the finalists chosen by the judges are chosen with a big eye towards who will be "good TV" and NOT just who are the best singers. There's always a couple of 'fan favorite' types who certainly aren't among the best singers. But they are fun to watch and help keep the ratings up.

 

 

The show is called American Idol, not American singer. They want to find somebody who will make them money and singing is only one part of the whole package.

[BlueStrat]

 

1) the finalists chosen by the judges are chosen with a big eye towards who will be "good TV" and NOT just who are the best singers.

 

 

And this is new in the pop music business......how, exactly?

[Vito Corleone]

And this is new in the pop music business...... how , exactly?

 

 

It's not. And I'm not even saying it's a bad thing. I'm just saying that they 'rig' the show to a certain degree by putting Sanjaya types in the finals that they know are good TV but have ZERO chance of winning the thing. And probably, along the way, they don't put forward other very good singers who might be too much like somebody else they already picked. "We don't need TWO David Cooks this season"....

[Vito Corleone]

Considering the phenomenal success that Carrie Underwood has had, I'm surprised they haven't tried harder to find more country singers. Where else can pretty girls who sing well and don't write their own material find MORE success than in country music?

[vanlatte]

 

If there is little or no entertainment value, then why waste your time in watching it? You can find better entertainment on YouTube.

 

 

I honestly have no idea what you are trying to say here, it doesn't seem to even apply to my post; did you mean to quote me?

[BlueStrat]

 

It's not. And I'm not even saying it's a bad thing. I'm just saying that they 'rig' the show to a certain degree by putting Sanjaya types in the finals that they know are good TV but have ZERO chance of winning the thing. And probably, along the way, they don't put forward other very good singers who might be too much like somebody else they already picked. "We don't need TWO David Cooks this season"....

 

 

I agree. But again, besides a competition, it's also a TV show, in fact more a TV show than an actual competition. Hence the 12 to begin with. They could just as easily narrow it down to 8, or 6, or 4, but marketing research has shown that the current format is most profitable for balancing ad revenues with ratings. Like I said before, if it were solely about singing, all of it would be done by top producers, not popular vote. But none of that doesn't mean that a really great singer can't emerge from the process.

 

I actually think it's great that a vehicle exists for someone who otherwise wouldn't have a shot at it to get a chance. I wonder if we'd have ever heard of Carrie Underwood or Jennifer Hudson or Kellie Pickler or Adam Lambert without AI. I'm all for any singer, player, writer, whatever finding success in whatever venue is available to them. Remember the old Star Search program? Same type of deal. Some bands or singers made the most of it (Sawyer Brown, Britney Spears, Justin Timberlake, Christine Aguilera, Leann Rimes, Dennis Miller (!) etc). Not all won, but they made it through their rounds and some went to the finals. One can't help but think such an exposure helped them later, if nothing else giving them encouragement to stick with it. Most contestants, of course, in all those shows go nowhere, but for those who do, it's a great opportunity. And sometimes it's entertaining to watch.

[BlueStrat]

 

Considering the phenomenal success that Carrie Underwood has had, I'm surprised they haven't tried harder to find more country singers. Where else can pretty girls who sing well and don't write their own material find MORE success than in country music?

 

 

Carrie actually does write, or co-write, some of her stuff. http://tasteofcountry.com/carrie-underwood-songwriting/

 

But you're right, it's one music format with a loyal fan base, where sub-genres are not important, and the fans still by CDs by the truckload.

[Vito Corleone]

Sadly he turned out to be a theatrical freak show on wheels but Adam Lambert has one of the best voices to ever be on the show IMO. Crazy effortless range.

 

 

One of the best voices EVER, period. When have you ever heard ANYONE sing like that? The night he sang with Queen he just made all those songs look completely effortless. You could see Brian May and Roger Taylor just looking at each other thinking, "WTF??"

[Vito Corleone]

I agree. But again, besides a competition, it's also a TV show, in fact more a TV show than an actual competition. Hence the 12 to begin with. They could just as easily narrow it down to 8, or 6, or 4, but marketing research has shown that the current format is most profitable for balancing ad revenues with ratings. Like I said before, if it were solely about singing, all of it would be done by top producers, not popular vote. But none of that doesn't mean that a really great singer can't emerge from the process. I actually think it's great that a vehicle exists for someone who otherwise wouldn't have a shot at it to get a chance. I wonder if we'd have ever heard of Carrie Underwood or Jennifer Hudson or Kellie Pickler or Adam Lambert without AI. I'm all for any singer, player, writer, whatever finding success in whatever venue is available to them. Remember the old Star Search program? Same type of deal. Some bands or singers made the most of it (Sawyer Brown, Britney Spears, Justin Timberlake, Christine Aguilera, Leann Rimes, Dennis Miller (!) etc). Not all won, but they made it through their rounds and some went to the finals. One can't help but think such an exposure helped them later, if nothing else giving them encouragement to stick with it. Most contestants, of course, in all those shows go nowhere, but for those who do, it's a great opportunity. And sometimes it's entertaining to watch.

 

 

I agree with all of that. I also think it's great in that it promotes actual SINGING. In this age of Autotune, it's great to have something out there to help kids understand the importance and value of SINGING well.

[Vito Corleone]

Carrie actually does write, or co-write, some of her stuff. http://tasteofcountry.com/carrie-underwood-songwriting/ But you're right, it's one music format with a loyal fan base, where sub-genres are not important, and the fans still by CDs by the truckload.

 

 

I know Carrie writes some stuff, which is great. It's just that, by and large, these kids they find for Idol aren't songwriters, nor are they looking for songwriters. But outside of country and R&B/pop soloists, it's VERY tough for the non-writing singers in this business. The fact that Chris Daughtry writes has been a big reason why he's had so much later success, IMO. Which is why somebody like a Taylor Hicks is likely to fail. GREAT voice, but unless somebody is cranking out some great songs for him that fit his voice..what are you gonna do with it? And there's only so many great songs from outside sources to go around. And most of the great songwriters seem to go to Nashville these days.

[BlueStrat]

 

I know Carrie writes some stuff, which is great. It's just that, by and large, these kids they find for Idol aren't songwriters, nor are they looking for songwriters. But outside of country and R&B/pop soloists, it's VERY tough for the non-writing singers in this business. The fact that Chris Daughtry writes has been a big reason why he's had so much later success, IMO. Which is why somebody like a Taylor Hicks is likely to fail. GREAT voice, but unless somebody is cranking out some great songs for him that fit his voice..what are you gonna do with it? And there's only so many great songs from outside sources to go around. And most of the great songwriters seem to go to Nashville these days.

 

 

Yep yep yep. I actually like the idea of the pro songwriters writing for artists. I think the correlation between the increase in crappy albums and too many artists writing their own material is undeniable. Back in the heyday, all the greats sang other people's material. Once the Beatles and Dylan got success doing their own stuff, everyone wanted to do their own material. Some of it's good, most not.

[Vito Corleone]

Yep yep yep. I actually like the idea of the pro songwriters writing for artists. I think the correlation between the increase in crappy albums and too many artists writing their own material is undeniable. Back in the heyday, all the greats sang other people's material. Once the Beatles and Dylan got success doing their own stuff, everyone wanted to do their own material. Some of it's good, most not.

 

 

Agreed.

 

Also, another way the show sort of "rigs" the outcome is that every season there are always a couple of kids in the Top 24 who no one has seen before. And they certainly are going to be at a disadvantage when compared to a kid who has been getting a lot of air time since his/her first audition and is already a 'fan favorite'. I had read that they were going to try and remedy that this season by focusing more on the ones who do get through early on. We'll see.

[wades_keys]

 

It's not. And I'm not even saying it's a bad thing. I'm just saying that they 'rig' the show to a certain degree by putting Sanjaya types in the finals that they know are good TV but have ZERO chance of winning the thing. And probably, along the way, they don't put forward other very good singers who might be too much like somebody else they already picked. "We don't need TWO David Cooks this season"....

 

Actually David, the producers were PISSED at the Sanjaya deal. The PUBLIC rigged him into the finals with massive block votes. They found loopholes in the e-voting system that allowed robo-voting and other not-so-honest things and they closed them.

[kmart]

The point is (since you can't seem to get it) is not that Ruben Studdard wears a suit. It's that you claimed looks had more to do with winning than talent . But people who aren't pretty have won, at least twice. The fail is on your end. But then, I guess it's all a conspiracy to you, it simply has to be, since you're wed to the idea that no great singer can possibly come out of AI.

 

 

Wow...

Clearly there's a reading comprehension issue here...or more appropriate, a 'get the context" issue.

 

It's not that Rubben Studdard wears A suit, it's that he fits a pre-existing stereotype image (the husky male R&B singer). Maybe you don't get the reference on the suit. Maybe you should have watched more Brady Bunch while you were younger. (See also "Johnny Bravo").

 

Anyway, you can twist this to be about 'pretty' ONLY all you want, but the fact of the matter is that AI is concerned about finding decent singers (broad/loose definition in play here) who above and beyond ALL else can be properly marketed based on the IMAGE that AI decides will have the biggest impact to their financial bottom line. A great looking girl with a middling voice will absolutely do better on that show than a dog with a great voice, because that's what AI wants (That's why someone like Susan Boyle would NEVER get on AI in the US).

 

For the most part, yeah, AI is all about pretty/attractive finalists, but as long as there's an obvious image they can lock someone into, they'll work with it: Rubben Studdard fit very easily into an obvious stereotype that the public is used to/comfortable seeing, so that was a no brainer.

 

 

And for the record, I'm not wed to the idea that a great singer CAN'T come out of AI (just certain that it's WAY unlikely a great singer would try to get on the show in the first place, and that so far, they have delivered what I'd categorize as great singers overall by a long shot).

Even if I was of that belief, though, it's nowhere near the level that you're so clearly and adamantly sure that the show is a pure indicator of singing talent, and only the best singers win, and the show is 100% based on viewer voting, and that a whole battalion of past competitors are truly GREAT singers...

 

All of which I believe, based on what I've seen, heard and understand, to be a load of BS.

 

You're happy believing all of that?

Please, continue enjoying it.

Just don't try and convince me the show is something it isn't.

[wades_keys]

Honestly, how can ANY of us know exactly what "weights" each judge assigns to looks, tv-readiness and the like?

 

The only thing we CAN do is observe what characteristics each winner has and try to extrapolate from that.

 

Which is pretty much what BlueStrat is doing I think.

 

These kinds of discussions can go around ALL DAY, but really only the judges themselves know why they voted for a particular contestant.

[Vito Corleone]

Actually David, the producers were PISSED at the Sanjaya deal. The PUBLIC rigged him into the finals with massive block votes. They found loopholes in the e-voting system that allowed robo-voting and other not-so-honest things and they closed them.

 

 

Yeah, but they put him up there in the first place. And they got BIG ratings from all of that. Hell, here it is 3 years later and we're still talking about Sanjaya. So I don't think they get nearly as "pissed" about that stuff as they maybe make it out to be. If they have problems with the voting system though, I'm sure they would honestly want to fix those.

 

And I know you're not accusing them of this, but just to say again---I don't see any upside for them in rigging the voting. Should it EVER be discovered that the voting was rigged, the whole empire comes crashing down. Which would be far worse for them than the fact that Taylor Hicks beats out Chris Daughtry or Catherine McPhee for the 'win'. Although they WOULD have some major problems should a Sanjaya type ever end up winning the whole thing. But, at the end of the day, I think the majority of the fans of the show really DO want to see the best singers win, so up and until a Sanjaya gets in the Top 3 or something, they probably don't have to worry about it.

[Vito Corleone]

And for the record, I'm not wed to the idea that a great singer CAN'T come out of AI (just certain that it's WAY unlikely a great singer would try to get on the show in the first place, and that so far, they have delivered what I'd categorize as great singers overall by a long shot). Even if I was of that belief, though, it's nowhere near the level that you're so clearly and adamantly sure that the show is a pure indicator of singing talent, and only the best singers win, and the show is 100% based on viewer voting, and that a whole battalion of past competitors are truly GREAT singers... All of which I believe, based on what I've seen, heard and understand, to be a load of BS. You're happy believing all of that? Please, continue enjoying it. Just don't try and convince me the show is something it isn't.

 

 

I'm just not sure what sort of "great" singers are out there who aren't ending up on AI? They make pretty clear every season what they are and aren't looking for: they want Pop singers between the ages of 15 and 29. Opera singers need not apply. They aren't looking for heavy metal screamers. And they talk a lot about looking for people with the "it" factor--which obviously means looks, personality, charisma. And a nice back-story they can sell helps a lot too.

 

But even within that narrow 'box', there's STILL a lot of room for great singing, and they find a LOT of that. Who do you think is out there that they are missing? I've think they've done well for themselves by establishing enough credibility so that singers like Chris Daughtry or Crystal Bowersox, who probably wouldn't have bothered auditioning for this type of show in the early years see it as a good opportunity for their careers. And it obviously has been for them.

 

Seems like they are making an interesting "outside the box" choice this season with the country-singing kid who sounds like Randy Travis. Don't know how far he'll be able to get with that voice, but a singer like that certainly won't need to win the show to be able to get a record deal.

[troyguitar]

 

One of the best voices EVER, period. When have you ever heard ANYONE sing like that? The night he sang with Queen he just made all those songs look completely effortless. You could see Brian May and Roger Taylor just looking at each other thinking, "WTF??"

 

 

And then he goes and sings a bunch of crappy songs instead of hooking up with a great band, just like everyone else from AI. That's my problem with the show - they find awesome singers, then have them sing a bunch of GREAT songs throughout the show, but after they win they give them crap for their own album. You don't need awesome singers for auto-tuned bubblegum, any pretty face will do. Let the good singers sing good music.

[Vito Corleone]

And then he goes and sings a bunch of crappy songs instead of hooking up with a great band, just like everyone else from AI. That's my problem with the show - they find awesome singers, then have them sing a bunch of GREAT songs throughout the show, but after they win they give them crap for their own album. You don't need awesome singers for auto-tuned bubblegum, any pretty face will do. Let the good singers sing good music.

 

 

Yeah, well that's one of the problems with the AI "machine" for sure. They want to keep all the singers and all the money 'in house' as much as possible. Rumor was Queen asked him to join after that performance. Not that hooking up with a couple of 60-somethings who haven't had a hit in decades would have been the best career move for him, but I doubt he could have done so even if he WANTED to, due to whatever contract he signed with the show.

 

But they let Daughtry do the 'band' thing after AI. So I don't think they are completely opposed to it. (At the end of the day, I'm sure all they care about is making money. HOW they make it is probably secondary.) It's just whaddya do after the show? I imagine they want to get these guys out there with some "product" as quickly as possible. Putting together a great rock band that can write a lot of its own tunes for Lambert to front is going to be MUCH more risky and time-consuming process than putting him in the studio to record some tracks as a solo vocalist.

 

BTW---I know Daughtry was fronting a band already when he did the Idol thing. Does anyone know---is his current band his OLD band? Or did they hook him up with the some different people?