You, Broadway and I seemed to all have the same thought. I was trying to remember how many children have ever been signed to singing contracts.
Originally Posted by RubyRed
Nemo, hon, if I can understand you, ANYONE can understand you. You made perfect sense to me. I'm glad that you're here.
That is true. I've noticed that there are huge difference between performances depending on where you listen to them. I always watch the shows first time from my computer, through a very good sound system, because the TV broadcasts in Finland comes about 10 days behind America. But when I sometimes watch the shows from my old bedroom TV, it sounds completely different. People who sounded great through good speakers, sounds very flat on TV. And few people who sounded good on TV, seem to be very much out of tune listened through good speakers. And it's obvious that on live everyone sounds better because of the atmosphere and background stir by audience.
Originally Posted by SoccerMom
I think alot of us get a different perception of the audio depending on the tv you have and the sound system that records it and the system that transmits it . The only way you have a true sound is in a recording studio listening only to the stream of the mic the artist is singing into.
We all know that music can be manfactured in a studio as well. Which is why many recording artists sound totally different in concert than they do on their Record or CD.
I have found that when I watch the show I use the audio through my stereo receiver to get as good a sound as I can to listen to each perfomer. Acustics in good auditorium can enhance the sound as well and energy adds to the experience.
So I guess that may explain why we each hear something a bit different.
Originally Posted by cabernetCally
3 weeks ago I went to the dress rehearsal and I called my husband after the show telling him they were all awesome. When we watched that night, my husband said, "I thought you said they were awesome." It was 90's night and a lot of the contestants got bashed. They definitely sound better live.
For someone who missed last nights show and is reading to catch up - whats this about picking groups...can someone explain
and BTW - I would LOVE to see that ABC expose. I hope its true.
I don't think Carrie is boring as some feel, after all she nailed the Heart song "Alone" and she sings in key and not flat.
Originally Posted by SoccerMom
I think Carrie should just stay away from some of the outfits because from what I can tell they make her a little uncomfortable and it tends to make her seem kind of stiff.
Of course, AI is going to promote her because she is a beautiful girl that can really sing well. Just look at pop star, Britney Spears going from the shy pop star to how she is today. I certainly hope Carrie will not go the "bad girl" direction, but that just shows how much a young star can change.
You are also right about Ruben and Fantasia, but look at someone like Josh Gracin that finished 4th in the 2nd season. He has a current #1 hit and was nominated for 2 CMT video awards so I think at this point, the contestants left can all pursue futures in entertainment if that is what they wish to do.
Years ago is a long stretch for a girl that just turned 22. Randy even stated early on that he was surprised that she hadn't already been DISCOVERED. You actually need to be discovered before anyone can sign you. If performance skills are what sells the artist then why did it take AI3 before Fantasia was signed. According to most on this thread she had the best performances of all yet she got signed because of AI.
Originally Posted by dpiranha
You're joking, right? If a child is defined as anyone 18 or under when they signed or had their first hit, let's see, there's the Jacksons, the Osmonds, Stevie Wonder, Brenda Lee, Connie Francis, Britney Spears, Leann Rimes, Menudo, Charlotte Church, Diana Ross, Ritchie Valens, Hansen, Bobby Rydel, Joan Jett, Cher (I think), Neil Sedaka (I think), Avril Lavigne...I'm sure I'm missing dozens more. 21 is not considered terribly young in the music industry.
Originally Posted by Muduh
The fact is, all AI finalists to date have been flawed in some obvious way (or, in most cases, ways). If they weren't, they wouldn't need to be on the show and go through this long, grueling process.
Exactly my point. Randy couldn't believe when he first heard her voice that no one had signed her already. Randy is a music pro and understands that 21 isn't young in this business. Now that he's watched her for two months, he has his answer -- awesome voice, pretty face, weak stage presence.
Originally Posted by razorbacker
I don't understand your point. For one thing, SOMEONE has to win AI every year. They don't have a "none of the above" phone line. And second, Fantasia was an 18-year-old single mom when she tried out -- she had a very good reason why she wasn't out playing professionally in front of talent scouts.
If performance skills are what sells the artist then why did it take AI3 before Fantasia was signed. According to most on this thread she had the best performances of all yet she got signed because of AI.
A pirate's life for me
I think the powers that be want Carrie to be the next IDOL winner. Besides the obvious (she's very pretty, technically a very good singer) she is the most marketable person there.
*my thoughts on this*
They want record sales...big record sales. Now, as an adult, I have more money to spend that your basic preteen watching AI. But, as an adult, I am pickier about what I spend my money on (considering there are so many other things to spend money on, such as my car, my house, everything else). Therefore, I will only purchase what I really like. The preteens (many of them with lots of money to spend) will buy cd's because someone is cute....or because their best friend bought it....or because Simon is on TV telling you that the person is just the greatest! Also, out of the remaining Idol contestants...I'd say the most appealing to the preteen set is probably ANTHONY, next Carrie and possibly Constantine or Vonzell. Bo is too manly for the boy-band loving preteens. Scott they wouldn't like at all. If the preteens can't have them an Idol they think is a cutie (Anthony?) then they will back one they might want to be like (Carrie, pretty girl who can sing.) Now, I like to think that the preteen cd-buying public buys cd's because they like the music.....but I think it's that with other factors built in (cuteness, or someone they'd like to be like.)
GEE I am rambling. To summarize.....Say Bo is the winner. I think he'd sell a lot of cd's, (I know I'd buy one) but I don't think that many purchasers would be from the preteen set. Say Carrie is the winner, I think she'd sell a lot of cd's to both the adults (I would NOT buy one) AND the preteen market. If Anthony won, I think he'd sell mostly to the preteens. Connie might sell to both markets (but not to my house). With this theory, the powers that be at AI would want Carrie to win. Plus, she seems more receptive to molding in whatever way they want. They're not going to be able to mold Bo, plus he doesn't need it.
Carrie has a strong voice, and seems like a clean-cut wholesome girl. (I personally find her dull.) They could market her in a variety of ways. Bo, they can only market him as what he is...Bo. (which, I might add, I find absolutely wonderful).
End of ramble about why I think they want Carrie to win.
*edited to add.....I know when I was a preteen, I would be affronted by someone telling me I bought something because I thought they were cute...then I think back on my album collection during my preteen years.....hee! I owned some badddd music. But they were cute! Then, its like it suddenly changed overnight, and I owned tons of great music, while still a preteen...I must have developed taste overnight then, LOL*
Last edited by suncat7; 04-21-2005 at 03:47 PM.
Always looking for cat treats! Breathe out, so I can breathe you in...
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.