Topic: Beiber lost to a sexy jazz singing bassist.
Ph !5pM9NZR/l6 started this discussion 15 years ago #1,091
Sounds good to me. Glad to hear the grammys judge on talent and not popularity. At least to some extent.Pic related it is Esperanza Spalding.
SQUARED :3 !L.....AlN. joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later[^] [v] #20,803
Bieber*
Ph !5pM9NZR/l6 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 27 seconds later, 3 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #20,806
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 6 minutes later, 10 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #20,812
She's cute. I've never heard any of her music, though. Is it good?
henn !NePD4JH0HI joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 12 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #20,814
What comes up, must come down.
Ph !5pM9NZR/l6 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 15 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #20,819
@20,812 (C)
I hadn't heard of her until this morning so I have only heard her biggest hits. She has a great voice but I haven't given her the greatest listen yet.
I hadn't heard of her until this morning so I have only heard her biggest hits. She has a great voice but I haven't given her the greatest listen yet.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 16 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #20,820
@OP
I approve of this by default.
@20,814 (henn !NePD4JH0HI)
lolthis. In a few years he'll be a male version of Lindsey Lohan.
I approve of this by default.
@20,814 (henn !NePD4JH0HI)
lolthis. In a few years he'll be a male version of Lindsey Lohan.
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 6 hours later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,106
> Justin Bieber makes music that millions of people listen to and enjoy.
> Give Grammy to some random
Oh, okay.
> Give Grammy to some random
Oh, okay.
Nexus !jNexusRe/. joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,111
Anonymous F replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,117
@previous (Nexus !jNexusRe/.)
> Nexus joins in
> Thread turns to shit
Oh, okay. Nexus, you are the worst poster on this site. Worse than DM, psychopath, or B2S.
> Nexus joins in
> Thread turns to shit
Oh, okay. Nexus, you are the worst poster on this site. Worse than DM, psychopath, or B2S.
Ph !5pM9NZR/l6 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,127
Anonymous F replied with this 15 years ago, 6 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,143
@previous (Ph !5pM9NZR/l6)
I'm not sure what the Grammyss criteria are.
I contest that as a general statement. The goal of musicians is to make beautiful music. Music is popular because people find it beautiful. Talent is not the end; it is a means.
I'm not sure what the Grammyss criteria are.
I contest that as a general statement. The goal of musicians is to make beautiful music. Music is popular because people find it beautiful. Talent is not the end; it is a means.
Ph !5pM9NZR/l6 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,149
@previous (F)
So you are really saying that this random canadian kid that got his big break on youtube is more talented than a classically trained musician because he markets to tweens better?
So you are really saying that this random canadian kid that got his big break on youtube is more talented than a classically trained musician because he markets to tweens better?
Anonymous F replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,153
GerK !SWvIfe9lJA joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,158
Anonymous F replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,167
Ph !5pM9NZR/l6 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 second later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,169
@21,153 (F)
I disagree that music is popular because people find it beautiful. If you were to ask 100 Bieber fans why they like his music, I would venture to say that not a single one would say because they find it beautiful. The same could be said of Lady Gaga and Kesha. In most cases(in terms of "Top 40" music) I would dare say the most resounding response would be because they find the artist themself attractive or because the music has a danceable beat.
I disagree that music is popular because people find it beautiful. If you were to ask 100 Bieber fans why they like his music, I would venture to say that not a single one would say because they find it beautiful. The same could be said of Lady Gaga and Kesha. In most cases(in terms of "Top 40" music) I would dare say the most resounding response would be because they find the artist themself attractive or because the music has a danceable beat.
Anonymous F replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,174
@previous (Ph !5pM9NZR/l6)
You are committing what I call the nominal or categorical fallacy, which is to state that categorizing or naming something changes the intrinsic qualities or nature of an object or idea. It matters not whether they would use the term beautiful; this is what they mean.
You are committing what I call the nominal or categorical fallacy, which is to state that categorizing or naming something changes the intrinsic qualities or nature of an object or idea. It matters not whether they would use the term beautiful; this is what they mean.
GerK !SWvIfe9lJA replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,193
@21,167 (F)
Not an argument actually, you put someone down because they said butthurt to what you said, I defended them because JB is a faggot and everyone here knows it.
Not an argument actually, you put someone down because they said butthurt to what you said, I defended them because JB is a faggot and everyone here knows it.
Ph !5pM9NZR/l6 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,199
@21,174 (F)
Fine I will recant my statement and offer a different one. The quality of a musician's work should always be regarded higher than the amount of fans they have. Simply having a large following does not mean that an artist is producing anything of value. An artist of any medium should be judged as "best" based on their ability to perform with their medium, not the amount of people that enjoy watching/listening to/viewing their work. As well I would trust professional opinions of those that have trained in the ability to critique music over that of a multitude preteen girls.
Fine I will recant my statement and offer a different one. The quality of a musician's work should always be regarded higher than the amount of fans they have. Simply having a large following does not mean that an artist is producing anything of value. An artist of any medium should be judged as "best" based on their ability to perform with their medium, not the amount of people that enjoy watching/listening to/viewing their work. As well I would trust professional opinions of those that have trained in the ability to critique music over that of a multitude preteen girls.
Anonymous F replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,203
@21,193 (GerK !SWvIfe9lJA)
I criticized Nexus' tendency to shitpost. Justin Bieber is dating Selena Gomez.
I criticized Nexus' tendency to shitpost. Justin Bieber is dating Selena Gomez.
Anonymous F double-posted this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,206
@21,199 (Ph !5pM9NZR/l6)
How does one measure quality of music, apart from the amount of people to which it brings happiness?
How does one measure quality of music, apart from the amount of people to which it brings happiness?
GerK !SWvIfe9lJA replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,217
@21,203 (F)
Justin Bieber is also a closet homo who plays the exact same drum thing every single time he gets onto a drum set.
Justin Bieber is also a closet homo who plays the exact same drum thing every single time he gets onto a drum set.
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,221
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,232
She's a talentless sheboon.
Anonymous F replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,235
@21,217 (GerK !SWvIfe9lJA)
That's nice... That's like saying Lincoln was a terrible president because he couldn't play banjo: not entirely relevant, is it?
That's nice... That's like saying Lincoln was a terrible president because he couldn't play banjo: not entirely relevant, is it?
Anonymous F double-posted this 15 years ago, 27 seconds later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,236
GerK !SWvIfe9lJA replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,239
Anonymous F replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,246
GerK !SWvIfe9lJA replied with this 15 years ago, 34 seconds later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,249
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 47 seconds later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,251
Ph !5pM9NZR/l6 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,254
@21,206 (F)
I don't know the precise criteria with which the Grammy voters judge upon, however they are urged to not be influenced by sales. I can at least fairly safely assume that the artists are judged on practical singing competition criteria. For the sake of this arguement practical singing competition should be defined along the lines of classical solo/ensemble competition, not a contemporary competition the likes of 'American Idol'.
These criteria have been quoted from: http://www.drachenwald.sca.org/node/121
Workmanship Criteria
• 1:Intonation: Tone quality, pitch, blend and balance: In solo singing, basically the individual pitches must sound as if they belong to the same mode or key. A good sense of beginning and staying with a pitch as much as possible must be observed in the performer. In ensemble singing, good relative pitch should be retained plus good coordination among all the parts. This is one of the most obvious marks of a good or bad ensemble.
• 2:Vocal Technique: Articulation, rhythmic accuracy, fluency, flexibility, breath control, etc. Effective use of breath to create the sound. Breathing should be done from the lower muscles of the body more than from the upper (i.e. - the chest should not heave up and down). In solo singing, the singer should be sensitive to the amount of breath required to sing a particular phrase; breaths should not be taken where it noticeably destroys continuity. In ensemble singing, good coordination of breaths should be observed.
• 3:Tone: Defined as sound or timbre pleasing to the ear. The words associated with this term might be "evenness" and "direction". In ensemble singing, the coordination of individual sounds in order to make an effective blend should be highly considered. Also balance of parts should come under the heading; no one voice should stick out overly much.
• 4:Rhythmic Integrity and interpretation: Style, tempo, phrasing, dynamic contract, etc. "Integrity" applies to a sensitivity to the main pulse of the music. Too much rushing and slowing down will tend to distract from good communication of the music and is quite noticeable. Ensembles particularly need to pay attention to rhythm in order to maintain cohesiveness.
• 5:Musical effect and diction. Phrasing and melodic sensitivity, artistry, expressive and musical feeling, etc.) Diction is the ability to convey precise verbal sounds within the context of the musical line; i.e., diction is important for the communication of the song but should not impede the communication.
• 6:Musicianship: Sensitivity to all aspects of execution in order to make an effective musical result: phrasing, dynamics (good sense of loud and soft singing), vocal attack. Anything that will convey a sense of security in the performance and will not distract the listener. This should portray the performer's mental preparation of the music: has the performer thought carefully of how the music should be done?
I don't know the precise criteria with which the Grammy voters judge upon, however they are urged to not be influenced by sales. I can at least fairly safely assume that the artists are judged on practical singing competition criteria. For the sake of this arguement practical singing competition should be defined along the lines of classical solo/ensemble competition, not a contemporary competition the likes of 'American Idol'.
These criteria have been quoted from: http://www.drachenwald.sca.org/node/121
Workmanship Criteria
• 1:Intonation: Tone quality, pitch, blend and balance: In solo singing, basically the individual pitches must sound as if they belong to the same mode or key. A good sense of beginning and staying with a pitch as much as possible must be observed in the performer. In ensemble singing, good relative pitch should be retained plus good coordination among all the parts. This is one of the most obvious marks of a good or bad ensemble.
• 2:Vocal Technique: Articulation, rhythmic accuracy, fluency, flexibility, breath control, etc. Effective use of breath to create the sound. Breathing should be done from the lower muscles of the body more than from the upper (i.e. - the chest should not heave up and down). In solo singing, the singer should be sensitive to the amount of breath required to sing a particular phrase; breaths should not be taken where it noticeably destroys continuity. In ensemble singing, good coordination of breaths should be observed.
• 3:Tone: Defined as sound or timbre pleasing to the ear. The words associated with this term might be "evenness" and "direction". In ensemble singing, the coordination of individual sounds in order to make an effective blend should be highly considered. Also balance of parts should come under the heading; no one voice should stick out overly much.
• 4:Rhythmic Integrity and interpretation: Style, tempo, phrasing, dynamic contract, etc. "Integrity" applies to a sensitivity to the main pulse of the music. Too much rushing and slowing down will tend to distract from good communication of the music and is quite noticeable. Ensembles particularly need to pay attention to rhythm in order to maintain cohesiveness.
• 5:Musical effect and diction. Phrasing and melodic sensitivity, artistry, expressive and musical feeling, etc.) Diction is the ability to convey precise verbal sounds within the context of the musical line; i.e., diction is important for the communication of the song but should not impede the communication.
• 6:Musicianship: Sensitivity to all aspects of execution in order to make an effective musical result: phrasing, dynamics (good sense of loud and soft singing), vocal attack. Anything that will convey a sense of security in the performance and will not distract the listener. This should portray the performer's mental preparation of the music: has the performer thought carefully of how the music should be done?
(Edited 59 seconds later.)
Anonymous F replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,272
@previous (Ph !5pM9NZR/l6)
I contend that modern production makes all of those points irrelevant.
I contend that modern production makes all of those points irrelevant.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
GerK !SWvIfe9lJA replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,277
Anonymous F replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,285
@previous (GerK !SWvIfe9lJA)
Yes, some/many of them can. However, we can not judge this by listening to a studio album.
Yes, some/many of them can. However, we can not judge this by listening to a studio album.
Ph !5pM9NZR/l6 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 32 seconds later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,286
@21,272 (F)
Do you have any background in performing a musical piece solo or as a part of an ensemble? These criteria are actually quite common in all manners of music performance competitions, not just vocal. Granted, it would be hard to critique say a hip hop artist while strictly sticking to these exact criteria. However, I do feel they accurately represent how a vocal composition would be judged. I put forth the accusation that you simply don't want to be bothered to read through these criteria and/or you do not fully understand what they entail. Any further attempt to continue this debate will fall on deaf ears. Good day sir.
Do you have any background in performing a musical piece solo or as a part of an ensemble? These criteria are actually quite common in all manners of music performance competitions, not just vocal. Granted, it would be hard to critique say a hip hop artist while strictly sticking to these exact criteria. However, I do feel they accurately represent how a vocal composition would be judged. I put forth the accusation that you simply don't want to be bothered to read through these criteria and/or you do not fully understand what they entail. Any further attempt to continue this debate will fall on deaf ears. Good day sir.
GerK !SWvIfe9lJA replied with this 15 years ago, 37 seconds later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,288
Anonymous F replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #21,298
@21,286 (Ph !5pM9NZR/l6)
Yes, I have extensive experience. The list you posted wasn't the grammy criteria list. I already know about what areas a vocal performance COULD be based, but that is not important: I want to know what the grammy IS not what it COULD be. How do they judge a vocal performance? From a studio album?
Yes, I have extensive experience. The list you posted wasn't the grammy criteria list. I already know about what areas a vocal performance COULD be based, but that is not important: I want to know what the grammy IS not what it COULD be. How do they judge a vocal performance? From a studio album?