American Idol 3/28/2007 "Results" *spoilers*

[timckelley]

Haley....the topic goes to her legs or what she is wearing, etc (which are nice, don't get me wrong)Understatement. :D :cool: :D

[latrobe7]

Of course it's a popularity contest; who the hell would want to watch a contest to determine the best singer? They are trying to be the next "Idol" not "singer" - take a look at the best selling pop acts and how many have/are really technically good singers? It's about presentation and charisma, it's about entertainment value, not necessarily singing in perfect rhythm or with perfect pitch. They definitely turn away good singers in the audition phase because the judges don't think they have stage presence or are marketable.

Ultimately, the show is a real long commercial for CDs and concerts...

[aindik]

The show is a popularity contest. But, it's based on voting, which (much like real politics, also based on voting) doesn't result in the thing that wins being the thing people are actually willing to pay their own money for. The voting is the flaw, not the fact that it isn't judged by singing judges like a figure skating competition.

They are currently selling studio-created extended-play versions of the Idol covers every week at AmericanIdol.com for $0.99. I think they should base the winner on that, rather than on free voting. Whoever has the fewest cumulative downloads (not just for that week, but over the course of the entire show), of all the people still alive on Wednesday morning, goes home that week. The person with the most paid downloads wins the show. This way, we get a true test of whether the singer is marketable musically, not simply based on his/her looks or personality.

[laststarfighter]

Ya, that's why they call it American Idol. On the other hand, the class presidents back in high school were chosen based on who was better qualified like making good on promises like bigger lockers for everyone, longer lunch periods, and video games in the commons. :up:

[TAsunder]

I'm pretty sure most pop acts of the kind AI is gearing towards feature competent singers, since the singers rarely have any job except to sing or look good. Sometimes they don't even look good. It would be dumb for the record companies hoisting up these pop singers to use poor singers as a general practice.

I agree, AI is a marketting tool. But the proof is in the pudding. Two winners have won multiple grammies... seems likely they are marketting good singers to me. VFTW uses the example of a singer described as "mandissa 2.0" or something like that being cut. Why would they want mandissa 2.0? They want Kelly Clarkson 2.0 or Carrie Underwood 2.0, if anything.

[r-u-kidding-me]

I'm pretty sure most pop acts of the kind AI is gearing towards feature competent singers, since the singers rarely have any job except to sing or look good. Sometimes they don't even look good. It would be dumb for the record companies hoisting up these pop singers to use poor singers as a general practice.

I agree, AI is a marketting tool. But the proof is in the pudding. Two winners have won multiple grammies... seems likely they are marketting good singers to me. VFTW uses the example of a singer described as "mandissa 2.0" or something like that being cut. Why would they want mandissa 2.0? They want Kelly Clarkson 2.0 or Carrie Underwood 2.0, if anything.

You market what sells. What sells is not always what is good, rather what is 'hip'...'in'...'groovy'...whatever the generation. It is still based on popularity.

I can't stand rap, but by god I'll 'throw some D's on it' since that seems to be the thing to do. (I assume they are Rims, but what the Hel are D's and what am I throwing them on?)

[Figaro]

It's that I can't read. .
No you can read, you just don't understand what you read. Time to head back to dictionary.com.

There are no judges in this "competition." It is being decided by popular vote. That is a popularity contest. When people vote for who they like best, that is a popularity contest not a singing competition.

[r-u-kidding-me]

No you can read, you just don't understand what you read. Time to head back to dictionary.com.

There are no judges in this "competition." It is being decided by popular vote. That is a popularity contest. When people vote for who they like best, that is a popularity contest not a singing competition.

WORD!

[TAsunder]

No you can read, you just don't understand what you read. Time to head back to dictionary.com.

There are no judges in this "competition." It is being decided by popular vote. That is a popularity contest. When people vote for who they like best, that is a popularity contest not a singing competition.

Yeah ok... I see you totally discarded your previous complaint now. Glad we got that one behind us.

It's both a popularity contest and a singing contest. People vote for the person they like as a singer. They are being judged predominantly based on their appeal as a singer, which would include technical proficiency, stage presence, attire, and any other element on which a pop singer is evaluated by his or her audience.

It could be a less flawed system, but it still has worked out well enough to produce 2 grammy winners. I don't think that's coincidence.

[r-u-kidding-me]

It could be a less flawed system, but it still has worked out well enough to produce 2 grammy winners. I don't think that's coincidence.

Right time...right place. Songs written for them etc....I could seriously list more female singers that could sing 'Jesus Take the Wheel' way better than CU. It is all about who gets pushed and promoted and that is based on popularity along with a little above basic singing skills

Don't make me throw down a Remix now

[TAsunder]

So if you held a popularity contest at your work and had the same marketting team behind it, you think the winner of your work popularity contest would win a grammy then too eh?

[Figaro]

Yeah ok... I see you totally discarded your previous complaint now. Glad we got that one behind us.

It's both a popularity contest and a singing contest. People vote for the person they like as a singer. They are being judged predominantly based on their appeal as a singer, which would include technical proficiency, stage presence, attire, and any other element on which a pop singer is evaluated by his or her audience.

It could be a less flawed system, but it still has worked out well enough to produce 2 grammy winners. I don't think that's coincidence.
No I am just tired of explaining it to you over and over again while you talk about the Olympics.

How is having a bunch of teenagers dialing in as many times as they can "judging people on their technical proficiency"?

You are just never going to get it. Enjoy the show man.

[r-u-kidding-me]

So if you held a popularity contest at your work and had the same marketting team behind it, you think the winner of your work popularity contest would win a grammy then too eh?

Hmmm...good question...but then again, Idol 'combed' the US for those individuals their talent agents gambled would make it big. They know what to look for. Not so sure I work with any 'cards' like that here, but yeah I don't think it takes as much as you think it does, being promoted on the most watched show right now and having Stern et al giving you tons of votes. Get a good songwriter, makeup artist, wardrobe designer, good studio producer - not impossible.....it is having those at your disposal that is

[latrobe7]

On another note, I believe an argument can be made that the Grammys are no better determinate of who is a 'good singer' than AI. I particularly like the comments by Maynard James Keenan; he might as well be talking about AI...

The Grammy Awards have been criticized on numerous occasions for being only devoted to mainstream music and for not highlighting alternative groups and artists. This has also lead to the speculation that The Grammy Awards are controlled and manipulated by major record labels.[citation needed] Evidence for this is limited, though the lack of non-mainstream acts being nominated for awards has supported this speculation.

There was well covered criticism of the Grammy Awards after the pop group Milli Vanilli won a Grammy, and it was later discovered that the two "singers" were actually just lip synching. As a result, their Grammys were withdrawn.

Some musical artists have had problems with the nature of the Grammys. The singer of progressive metal band Tool did not attend the Grammy ceremony to receive their award. Lead singer Maynard James Keenan explained his thoughts of the Grammys:

"I think the Grammys are nothing more than some gigantic promotional machine for the music industry. They cater to a low intellect and they feed the masses. They don't honor the arts or the artist for what he created. It's the music business celebrating itself. That's basically what it's all about."

—Maynard James Keenan, Gabriella (July 2002). Interview with Maynard James Keenan of Tool. NY Rock.

As with all media awards, the Grammy Awards are often criticized for failing to adequately represent the popular sentiment of the public.
...
However, the nature of both the nominating and voting processes are becoming increasingly questioned by industry critics.

There is much debate about whether or not this sort of nominating process is the result of commercial, political or industry bias. Some conservative critics have argued that major award shows like the Grammy Awards are merely the recording industry's attempt to congratulate their own while advertising their products and ideas through the use of selection bias in the nominating process. The winners, critics argue, would naturally reflect "the social, political and artistic preferences of the nominating and voting members." Other critics, including those within the industry, openly question whether the Grammy Awards are even relevant in today's digital society.from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammy_Award

[TAsunder]

No I am just tired of explaining it to you over and over again while you talk about the Olympics.

How is having a bunch of teenagers dialing in as many times as they can "judging people on their technical proficiency"?

You are just never going to get it. Enjoy the show man.

Did you miss the rest of the sentence you quoted? It was a list of what makes people appealing as a singer. No one is filling out a form or using some lame texbook to judge specific things (except maybe you), but a singer who is technically inept is going to be less appealing than another singer who is otherwise identical.

Sorry that the industry you cherish is such crap, but that's the way it is. Singing is just one small aspect of what makes a good band. Idol does a decent job of finding singers who fit into the crap mainstream pop and who will succeed in a pop band. It does so based on their performance as singers in front of a TV audience, which for the most part would be the same people who ultimately buy their albums.

[r-u-kidding-me]

Idol does a decent job of finding singers who fit into the crap mainstream pop and who will succeed in a pop band. It does so based on their performance as singers in front of a TV audience, which for the most part would be the same people who ultimately buy their albums.

I wonder what 'pop' is short for? Popular? Doesn't always have much to do with singing. It is a popularity competition and by jove, we will convince you if its the last thing we do :D

IMO - its elements of both arguments here. I mean they have to be able to sing a tune at least to appease the common 'moron' - but hey, rap has been around way longer than anticipated. Other than that.....its all fluff

[JETarpon]

Based on dialidol's state maps, the highest number of votes for Sanjayjay are coming from New Jersey, California and Texas.

Percentage wise, Alaska has them all beat. :D

[Figaro]

Did you miss the rest of the sentence you quoted? It was a list of what makes people appealing as a singer. No one is filling out a form or using some lame texbook to judge specific things (except maybe you), but a singer who is technically inept is going to be less appealing than another singer who is otherwise identical.

Sorry that the industry you cherish is such crap, but that's the way it is. Singing is just one small aspect of what makes a good band. Idol does a decent job of finding singers who fit into the crap mainstream pop and who will succeed in a pop band. It does so based on their performance as singers in front of a TV audience, which for the most part would be the same people who ultimately buy their albums.
So in essence they are testing the people's popularity. That is why it is a popularity contest. Not a singing contest.

[aindik]

It could be a less flawed system, but it still has worked out well enough to produce 2 grammy winners. I don't think that's coincidence.

They've had 5 winners. Only two (plus one runner-up) have had commercial success as recording artists. To be fair, the jury is still out on the efforts of the folks from last season, but it looks pretty clear that both Chris Daughtry and Katharine McPhee will outsell Taylor Hicks many times over.

So, they find successful artists. But those artists don't always win the competition.

[TAsunder]

I wonder what 'pop' is short for? Popular? Doesn't always have much to do with singing. It is a popularity competition and by jove, we will convince you if its the last thing we do :D

IMO - its elements of both arguments here. I mean they have to be able to sing a tune at least to appease the common 'moron' - but hey, rap has been around way longer than anticipated. Other than that.....its all fluff

Right, just as the pop in pop music is short for popular. You don't need to convince me that pop music is a crap genre. I was convinced of that a long time ago. That's why about 95% of the albums I buy are from indie labels and feature musicians who wouldn't be featured on AI in a million years.

What you won't be successful at convincing me of is that AI singers are not good pop singers. There is too much evidence to the contrary. It's the genre itself that's the problem. AI does a good job of finding pop singers, and the contestants who make it to the end are generally the best pop singers, and those pop singers create successful albums.

[TAsunder]

So in essence they are testing the people's popularity. That is why it is a popularity contest. Not a singing contest.

Except that they are testing people's popularity AS A SINGER.

[r-u-kidding-me]

What you won't be successful at convincing me of is that AI singers are not good pop singers. There is too much evidence to the contrary. It's the genre itself that's the problem. AI does a good job of finding pop singers, and the contestants who make it to the end are generally the best pop singers, and those pop singers create successful albums.

Like deluded Sanjay voters, you miss the mark once again! AI does not "FIND" pop singers PERIOD. They MAKE pop singers and with a little effort, you could be pop singer. But do you have the Charisma, charm, sex appeal, personality, intellect etc to be in the 'limelight' and promote and sell (based on some of your rationale here - not). That has little to do with singing.

Sorry dude - popularity contest - hands down!

[bruinfan]

who's more popular...

TAsunder or Figaro??

[r-u-kidding-me]

who's more popular...

TAsunder or Figaro??

They gotta sing first :D

[jlb]

Interesting aside to all of this..............

I would agree that Chris Sligh did not do great on the show. However, I just found out about his band, Half Past Forever. I went to their website and listened to some of the music and it is really good.

http://www.halfpastforever.com/

[jsmeeker]

who is hotter?

[r-u-kidding-me]

Interesting aside to all of this..............

I would agree that Chris Sligh did not do great on the show. However, I just found out about his band, Half Past Forever. I went to their website and listened to some of the music and it is really good.

http://www.halfpastforever.com/

I went to his site last week and it talks of him as 'former'.....

[Figaro]

Interesting aside to all of this..............

I would agree that Chris Sligh did not do great on the show. However, I just found out about his band, Half Past Forever. I went to their website and listened to some of the music and it is really good.

http://www.halfpastforever.com/
Don't let your pals at Graycharles.com know that you are pimping another site! :D

[aindik]

Don't let your pals at Graycharlse.com know that you are pimping another site! :D

Or his pals at stormlarge.com

A pattern is beginning to emerge. :D

[NJChris]

Which is more frightening:

The amount of Votes for Sanjaya or
The extent to which people take this show so personally.

[PJO1966]

Which is more frightening:

The amount of Votes for Sanjaya or
The extent to which people take this show so personally.


#2

[TAsunder]

Like deluded Sanjay voters, you miss the mark once again! AI does not "FIND" pop singers PERIOD. They MAKE pop singers and with a little effort, you could be pop singer. But do you have the Charisma, charm, sex appeal, personality, intellect etc to be in the 'limelight' and promote and sell (based on some of your rationale here - not). That has little to do with singing.

Sorry dude - popularity contest - hands down!

The problem with it having "little" to do with singing is, if they were terrible singers, they would not succeed (once off the show), and many people who are ugly/uncharismatic make it pretty far into the show seemingly because they are good singers. Fantasia was not exactly the world's sexiest female. Not really sure how anyone could classify ruben as someone with intellect, sex appeal, etc.

Singing is a major factor in this show.

[pinkpanther54494]

The finalists need a minimum level of musical ability to compete in this competition. From there it turns into who is more entertaining, thereby making them popular.

[timckelley]

Well for me, and for many other Americans (I would hope), I form my opinion based on a mixture of who I think is the best singer and best entertainer. By "entertainer", I'm including things like physical gestures they make. (Example: I subtract a point for Melinda's head shaking and hand shaking, though to be fair, last week, she was much better at not doing that.) Dancing is another gesture that plays into it. If singer A sings just barely better than singer B, but singer B is a much better dancer than singer A, I think singer B has the advantage.

[TAsunder]

Minimum musical ability being what 99.9% of americans do not have.