|
|
|
|
PLEASE NOTE: The Reality TV World Message Boards are filled with desperate
attention-seekers pretending to be one big happy PG/PG13-rated family. Don't
be fooled. Trying to get everyone to agree with you is like herding cats,
but intolerance for other viewpoints is NOT welcome and respect for other
posters IS required at all times. Jump in and play, and you'll soon find out
how easy it is to fit in, but save your drama for your mama. All members are
encouraged to read the
complete guidelines.
As entertainment critic Roger
Ebert once said, "If you disagree with something I write, tell me so, argue
with me, correct me--but don't tell me to shut up. That's not the American way."
|
|
|
"Isn't 'Taking Risks' Overrated?"
Velcrohead 33 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Beauty Pageant Celebrity Judge"
|
09-06-06, 12:45 PM (EST)
 
  |
|
"Isn't 'Taking Risks' Overrated?" |
A thing I’d like to bring up: The general consensus with Magni is how he’s competent, consistent but ‘sounds the same.’ I get the gist regarding the latter but I’ve never really understood why this is so important. In an audition it’s beneficial, no doubt, to show range and demonstrate an ability to tackle different material. Yet the reality of the music business suggests otherwise, doesn’t it? Artists establish themselves and ensure longevity by adopting a style and sticking to it. Being a one trick pony in the business is, therefore, and contrary to what we usually perceive, actually a good thing. And an even better one if they can make the sound uniquely theirs on a regular basis. If I was to compile a list of my favourite all-time artists, the one commonality would be that their vibe, their resonance, their approach – whatever you want to call it – is pretty much standard. In other words, I know exactly what I’m going to get. For example, U2 have been putting out great pop rock songs for two decades. Nobody is ever likely to label their material as formulaic – a word that carries negative connotations – but by definition, that’s what it is. Consider whether it’s really a coincidence that their least commercially successful album was “Zooropa” (and the follow-up, “Pop,” albeit to a lesser extent), one, which by the band’s own admission, was an experimental effort, a foray into the electro/techno field. Which is not to say it was bad, just not quite up to the benchmark. Their two most recent records, “All That You Can’t Leave Behind” and “How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb” reverted to the tried and trusted and was the all the better for it. Which brings me back to Magni. If you asserted that he lacks true rock star quality, I might not disagree. Not right for Supernova? Quite possibly. If, however, you label him a great cover artist, I’d like to know why this is inherently a negative. If he doesn’t interpret songs differently and/or puts his own spin on it, I need convincing how that is a failing (not being able to do it and choosing not to, presumably to preserve the integrity of the original, are completely different things, after all). Also, why an understated stage presence equates to boring. How having a great voice could ever be an afterthought or a backhanded compliment in a signing competition, as I’ve construed it in the context of a lot of what I’ve read on these boards to be. And finally, the whole consistency versus taking risks argument. Call me a cynic but I often think the latter is no more than an artist’s ego trip commensurate to their status in the industry, a big-time performer looking to throw their weight around. They take liberties not because it might bring improvement but simply because they can. How many can afford to? Usually, the end result is that curious dichotomy: a critic’s acclaim being inversely proportional to it’s popularity to the masses. Reinventing yourself as an artist is often trade speak for struggling sales (there’s that cynical side again!) and the need to court publicity (like, erm, Supernova). A generalisation, of course, but those who lasted the distance have done so precisely because they had it right from the start: they never needed to change. Sorry about the long post. I had a sudden urge to vent..... 
|
|
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
cheesybread 198 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Blistex Spokesperson"
|
09-06-06, 02:11 PM (EST)
|
|
2. "RE: Isn't 'Taking Risks' Overrated?" |
Velcrohead, I take your point. And I agree but I think there are examples to the contrary as well. Take for example Stone Temple Pilots. I don't think any two of their albums sound alike. Each one seemed an experiment, but all are very good if not great. Taken collectively I think all of their music sounds like "them" now, because of familiarity, however each album taken independantly sounds distinct from the next.Although, I agree that reproducing a song in it's original form isn't a bad thing and a subdued stage personality isn't always a drawback either, this competition is about gaining attention and generating excitement for an "old" band. If these guys are going to tour and perform the collected works of G'n'R, the Crue, and Metallica then consistency and a strong cover ability is the key asset a singer could bring. However, for a bunch of established musicians looking to break new ground (or at least go in a new direction from previous efforts) then I would think a distinctly original frontman would be desirable.
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
geg6 14941 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
|
09-06-06, 02:39 PM (EST)
|
|
3. "RE: Isn't 'Taking Risks' Overrated?" |
Artists
>establish themselves and ensure longevity
>by adopting a style and
>sticking to it. Being a
>one trick pony in the
>business is, therefore, and contrary
>to what we usually perceive,
>actually a good thing.
And
>an even better one if
>they can make the sound
>uniquely theirs on a regular
>basis. I'd agree only to a certain extent. Some of the greatest rock artists were able to explore different styles and genres while still retaining their particular uniqueness. A good example would be the Rolling Stones. They've had hits in straight out rock, blues, rap, R&B, country, and acid rock. You know it's a Stones song, but it might not be a genre you expect. I could also point to Bob Dylan as an artist who has spanned just about every musical style ever invented. I don't mean to knock anyone by saying this (because I love some bands who do exactly what they do and nothing else), but some bands just aren't talented enough or versatile enough to carry that off. Some can. And those that can are, IMHO, the true greats. >If I was to compile a
>list of my favourite all-time
>artists, the one commonality would
>be that their vibe, their
>resonance, their approach – whatever
>you want to call it
>– is pretty much standard.
>In other words, I know
>exactly what I’m going to
>get. Again, it depends. If I don't expect anything more from them (for instance, Bon Jovi), then I'm perfectly happy to hear them do the same thing over and over. But if I consider them real "artists," then that would totally disappoint me. >Consider whether it’s really a
>coincidence that their least commercially
>successful album was “Zooropa” (and
>the follow-up, “Pop,” albeit to
>a lesser extent), one, which
>by the band’s own admission,
>was an experimental effort, a
>foray into the electro/techno field.
>Which is not to say
>it was bad, just not
>quite up to the benchmark. I'd disagree. Both of those albums were most definitely not their best efforts. If a band wants to experiment, I'm fine, even excited, by that. But if the experiment pretty much stinks, then it deserves to tank on it's own merits. Of which both Zooropa and Pop had few.
>Which brings me back to Magni.
>If you asserted that he
>lacks true rock star quality,
>I might not disagree. Not
>right for Supernova? Quite possibly.
>If, however, you label him
>a great cover artist, I’d
>like to know why this
>is inherently a negative. Because the role of lead singer in a so-called big time rock band should be much, much more than a cover singer. I can hear good cover singers every single night of the week here my small town. I expect a bit more from someone who is charging me $50-100 to see and hear. If
>he doesn’t interpret songs differently
>and/or puts his own spin
>on it, I need convincing
>how that is a failing
>(not being able to do
>it and choosing not to,
>presumably to preserve the integrity
>of the original, are completely
>different things, after all). Magni's problem is he has not yet put his own stamp on any of the covers he's done. He's wonderful at singing it the way it was originally done, but I have more respect for someone who tries a re-arrangement (even if it fails miserably, like Lukas' last night) than someone who is not even willing to take the risk. Also,
>why an understated stage presence
>equates to boring. I don't go to rock shows to see someone standing there doing nothing. I've paid lots of jack to see this person, they better give me a show. I'll go back to Dylan for a minute. I own most of his catalog, so I'm a fan. But I've only seen him once and I never will go see him again because of it. He stood with his back to the audience the whole time, never acknowledged the audience a single time, and just disprespected everyone there. I know he has some issues, but I don't go to watch anyone turn their back or just stand there. I'll buy the CD, thank you very much. How having
>a great voice could ever
>be an afterthought or a
>backhanded compliment in a signing
>competition, as I’ve construed it
>in the context of a
>lot of what I’ve read
>on these boards to be. I don't see that at all. Magni does have a great voice. What's wrong with saying so? >And finally, the whole consistency versus
>taking risks argument. Call me
>a cynic but I often
>think the latter is no
>more than an artist’s ego
>trip commensurate to their status
>in the industry, a big-time
>performer looking to throw their
>weight around. They take liberties
>not because it might bring
>improvement but simply because they
>can. How many can afford
>to? Usually, the end result
>is that curious dichotomy: a
>critic’s acclaim being inversely proportional
>to it’s popularity to the
>masses. If taking risks does nothing to improve, then I'd agree. But to say that taking risks is somehow arrogant is ridiculous. Sorry, but it just is. >Reinventing yourself as an artist is
>often trade speak for struggling
>sales (there’s that cynical side
>again!) and the need to
>court publicity (like, erm, Supernova).
>A generalisation, of course, but
>those who lasted the distance
>have done so precisely because
>they had it right from
>the start: they never needed
>to change. Again, bull. I refer you back to the Rolling Stones. 
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
weltek 16933 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
|
09-06-06, 02:41 PM (EST)
|
|
4. "RE: Isn't 'Taking Risks' Overrated?" |
Taking risks mid-show should be applauded, IMHO. Early on, it could be the death of you. Taking risks shows confidence and creativity. If you've proven yourself as a great cover artist up to that point, the "judges" will likely see you've taken a risk & not punish you for that if it doesn't go GREAT. And taking risks as a stage performer is huge. That musician needs to sell the band, pull people in. Taking risks is often the difference between bands that make it vs. great bar bands. Reinventing yourself as an artist is often trade speak for struggling sales (there’s that cynical side again!) and the need to court publicity (like, erm, Supernova). A generalisation, of course, but those who lasted the distance have done so precisely because they had it right from the start: they never needed to change. Taking risks doesn't mean reinventing yourself, necessarily. It just means a little spark of creativity should show itself. And although Magni is popular in his country, I don't think that means he's hit the level where he shouldn't consider taking some risks and giving viewers a reason to stand up and take notice via some forward thinking. I guess this is a difference, for me, between RS & AI. AI artists I expect to be "safe." RS artists I expect to be more risky and edgy. 
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
michel 10812 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
|
09-06-06, 06:51 PM (EST)
|
|
5. "RE: Isn't 'Taking Risks' Overrated?" |
LAST EDITED ON 09-06-06 AT 06:55 PM (EST)I’ve felt for a long time that Magni would be the wisest choice for SN if not the flashiest. I agree with VH that a singer needs to deliver a strong performance before doing different things. Trying to refute this by bringing up “The Rolling Stones” is confusing variety with changing styles. The Stones have changed, going all the way to disco in the late 70s but from “Exile…”, “Sticky Fingers” through “It’s only Rock n’Roll”, a 4 year span, their style remained the same. Sure, “Time is on my side” isn’t “Brown Sugar” but Magni’s “Creep” and the acoustic “Dolphin’s cry” wasn’t the same as “Fire” either!
And as far as taking risks being somewhat arrogant, I can also take one of Geg’s example to further the argument. When Dylan went electric, he did it despite what his original fans wanted. He was good enough to get new ones and carry over some of the old ones but many never went along. The change was a risk, it had a level of arrogance and in this case it paid off. “Pop” was arrogant because the powerful social comment it delivered became more important than the music. Quite often, the changes that aren’t arrogant are done by selling out. Think of Rod Stewart here and many like him.
To get back to Magni, we have heard no more than a dozen songs from each singer so maybe establishing their own style is more important than trying everything and anything. Storm may have tried too much to change and she may have gotten herself out of contention for it. Ryan also tried to do too much with the champagne bottle and climbing on the speakers. On the other hand, Lukas and Magni have established themselves in my mind and before I want something new, I’d like to see more of what they have to offer here and now. If you remember, many singers have gone to Magni to help them get their sound after receiving the new songs. The man has enough talent to change it up. He has enough sense to do it right! His original was the style that SN is trying to get and it wasn’t the same style of song as “Back in the USSR”. Even if his movements were similar, the intensity and anger wasn’t the same. Toby has made runs around the studio in a few performances, if I had paid $100 for a front row seat, I’d like to see him on stage for a song or two. Would he run for 20 straight songs? One thing that is forgotten was that Magni did run around the studio before Toby started. Remember, he was asked why didn’t he go up the stairs and he answered they had poor lighting. The following week, Toby copied the idea.
At the heart of any concert, there is the song. Before putting on a show, deliver the song. Magni has delivered as often as anyone if not more.
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
 |
|
Velcrohead 33 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Beauty Pageant Celebrity Judge"
|
09-06-06, 08:04 PM (EST)
|
|
6. "RE: Isn't 'Taking Risks' Overrated?" |
LAST EDITED ON 09-06-06 AT 08:24 PM (EST)Thanks to all who replied. I like a good debate! Some things I'd like to respond to. Velcrohead, I take your point. And I agree but I think there are examples to the contrary as well. Take for example Stone Temple Pilots. I don't think any two of their albums sound alike. Each one seemed an experiment, but all are very good if not great. Taken collectively I think all of their music sounds like "them" now, because of familiarity, however each album taken independantly sounds distinct from the next. You’re right cheesybread, there are always exceptions. I was merely looking to paint broad brushstrokes, is all. Although, I agree that reproducing a song in it's original form isn't a bad thing and a subdued stage personality isn't always a drawback either, this competition is about gaining attention and generating excitement for an "old" band. Have you noticed how positively the crowd respond to Magni, though? I do sometimes forget that it’s about finding someone who would blend best with Supernova. My opinion of Magni is probably independent to that, but still, there is something to be said about the audience’s reaction to him, isn’t there? If these guys are going to tour and perform the collected works of G'n'R, the Crue, and Metallica then consistency and a strong cover ability is the key asset a singer could bring. However, for a bunch of established musicians looking to break new ground (or at least go in a new direction from previous efforts) then I would think a distinctly original frontman would be desirable. And I would say therein lies the rub. A distinctly original frontman, as you put it, can’t hide the fact that the remaining ¾ are remnants of varyingly successful outfits: the baggage comes with them and people will inevitably draw comparisons. They're not going in a new direction so much as trying to escape the past.
Geg, my turn again 
Some of the greatest rock artists were able to explore different styles and genres while still retaining their particular uniqueness. A good example would be the Rolling Stones. I don't mean to knock anyone by saying this (because I love some bands who do exactly what they do and nothing else), but some bands just aren't talented enough or versatile enough to carry that off. Some can. And those that can are, IMHO, the true greats. The Stones were/are still a great band. The question to ask though is whether their longevity was in spite of their dabbling with other genres or because their fan base were happy to accept it for no other reason than they’d earned the right to. Artists may diversify but they almost always revert to type, go back to their roots if you like. If they didn’t they would lose the identity that gained them recognition. One can never know but would they have been any less successful had they just stuck to pure rock? I’d submit to you that a ‘best of’ list of Stones’ tracks would be predominantly in that category. And just my opinion, but versatility has nothing to do with talent; ‘jack-of-all-trades, master of none’ springs to mind.
They've had hits in straight out rock, blues, rap, R&B, country, and acid rock. You know it's a Stones song, but it might not be a genre you expect.
No, but it could be argued that it never strays so far off point that you wouldn’t have known they were anything other than a rock band. See what I mean?
If I don't expect anything more from them (for instance, Bon Jovi), then I'm perfectly happy to hear them do the same thing over and over. But if I consider them real "artists," then that would totally disappoint me.
An interesting take. What if I said Elton John has been doing the same thing over and over for nigh on 35 years. Is he any less of a real artist because of it?
If a band wants to experiment, I'm fine, even excited, by that. But if the experiment pretty much stinks, then it deserves to tank on it's own merits. Of which both Zooropa and Pop had few.
…which is the point I was trying to make. Fans didn’t like it (as much) and it hardly garnered new admirers. So they went back to what they did best with the albums subsequent to ‘Zooropa” and “Pop.” Who wasn’t delighted by that?
Because the role of lead singer in a so-called big time rock band should be much, much more than a cover singer. I expect a bit more from someone who is charging me $50-100 to see and hear.
Did no harm with JD last season. Indeed, that may well have been a compelling reason, amongst others, as to why he was hired to be the lead singer of INXS. He covers their back catalog extremely well.
I can hear good cover singers every single night of the week here my small town
Now you’re just being facetious. That, or I’m thinking I wouldn’t mind visiting your small town to check out what sounds like a decent local scene. Regardless, these ‘good cover singers’ could conceivably, however unlikely, go on to bigger and better things. Which, when you think about it, is pretty much the history of all the contestants here – starting off with small gigs, doing other people’s material.
Magni's problem is he has not yet put his own stamp on any of the covers he's done. He's wonderful at singing it the way it was originally done, but I have more respect for someone who tries a re-arrangement (even if it fails miserably, like Lukas' last night) than someone who is not even willing to take the risk.
I don’t disagree. What I tried to articulate in my original post, however, wasn’t that taking risks is bad – better to have tried and failed than not at all, and all that. Rather, that opting out of reinterpreting a song should, in of itself, not be automatically construed as a weakness. Or that the artist in question lacks originality. Granted, it’s entirely subjective but I thought Magni addressed that somewhat with his own song last night.
I don't go to rock shows to see someone standing there doing nothing. I've paid lots of jack to see this person, they better give me a show.
It’s about perspective, surely. In a rock show, almost undoubtedly. On the other hand, millions willingly pay good money to watch Pavarotti pretty much stand still for two hours and just deliver the songs. To be clear, I can still be captivated by someone who declines gallivanting around the stage. Understated is not the same as doing nothing. Less sometimes really can be more.
I'll go back to Dylan for a minute. I own most of his catalog, so I'm a fan. But I've only seen him once and I never will go see him again because of it. He stood with his back to the audience the whole time, never acknowledged the audience a single time, and just disprespected everyone there. I know he has some issues, but I don't go to watch anyone turn their back or just stand there. I'll buy the CD, thank you very much.
So how do you reconcile that with Dylan being a real artist and a rock star? Some acts are brilliant stage performers though not necessarily memorable recording artists. The opposite is also true, as you discovered with Dylan. Do you have to excel at both to be great? If yes, then does Dylan really deserve all the accolades bestowed to him over the years?
Magni does have a great voice. What's wrong with saying so?
Nothing whatsoever. It’s probably just my interpretation of some of the posts on the message board as “Magni has a great voice…..so what?’ when really it should be what counts the most.
If taking risks does nothing to improve, then I'd agree. But to say that taking risks is somehow arrogant is ridiculous. Sorry, but it just is.
Ridiculous perhaps, but isn't rendered inaccurate as far as the music business is concerned (see also above)
Again, bull. I refer you back to the Rolling Stones.
You know I was only being semi-serious, right? I did mention it was a generalisation as well. Nevertheless, I maintain the veracity of my assertion holds, even if it’s only at face value.
And michel:
At the heart of any concert, there is the song. Before putting on a show, deliver the song. Magni has delivered as often as anyone if not more. Yes! Thank you for putting in a nutshell what I strived to say in my usual roundabout way. (P.S. One week to go for that ‘other’ show.  )
VH
*Edited because all that bold I originally used for the quotes would give people eye strain*
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
|
|
|
p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
|
|
Email this topic to a friend
Printer-friendly version of this topic
Bookmark this topic (Registered users only)
