Credibility of The Voice

[JayOwl]

This goes for other reality TV talent competitions, maybe not so much shows like the X Factor because they're just abysmal but moving on..

So I was talking with my friend a couple of days ago about how hard it is for a musician to have a shot at making music their career even if they have a lot of talent and I'm not talking riches and fame, I mean just making a decent living. I've heard that it used to be a least a little easier a few decades ago but I digress.

We're both musicians, both university age or just before, I'm starting a music course next month. Now he's really good- lovely voice and great piano and saxophone player. I'm also a vocalist and play flute and guitar. He's in a band mostly playing rock n roll, blues, jazz and reggae. All of them individually are talented, no spare member. They've played at weddings and other events like that. All of his band mates are really anti reality talent competition TV, so am I and so's he to an extent, however although he's not 100% sure he'll even go for music as a career he said he wouldn't completely rule out applying for something like The Voice because in many ways it's merely a way for people with talent to gain exposure and at the very least a small and loyal fanbase.

That's obviously a huge step up from having nearly nothing. Using the voice again as an example, what's the harm if the contestant is truly talented right? Yes the 'battle' rounds are utterly embarrassing and mediocrity is over-celebrated far too often but if you could start a career you wouldn't otherwise be able to it seems reasonable.

The main problem it seems is once a contestant is done they're forever tarnished by the fact that they've been on the show, they'll never be able to disassociate themselves from it completely and therefore will never be respected in the same way as say Jimi Hendrix or Freddie Mercury *even* if (high standards I know) they had similar songwriting and performing talent. Of course if the contestant does well in some ways it's worse because they usually end up in the clutches of some super controlling label determined to churn out marketable pop hits through them.

Obviously the best way is to do it without having to even go there but like I said it's so difficult, especially with the industry as it is (That is, so much awful music everywhere). So what do you think? Would you listen to a former reality TV star if their music was to your taste or would you immediately think less of them the moment you found out they'd been there?

 

[Nerys Myk]

If I like them I like them. Why would it matter if they were on reality show or not?

A friend of mind loves Kelly Clarkson, he had no idea she won American Idol.

 

[JayOwl]

^I was thinking of her actually when posting my 2nd to last paragraph because she's really managed to shake off her connection. She sort of outgrew the show and created her own pop-rock musical identity. But then that's rare.

That makes sense of course and I agree but there's a lot of stigma attached to it because certainly with the X Factor (and they're often grouped together) it's very often a shot at a fast track to fame for people who have an average voice and aren't that interested in music at all, not to mention that there's next to no chance of a full band even showing up.

I'm just interested to see what people think. What do you think of the shows themselves? Also do you think someone would ever be able to obtain 'legendary' status after it?

 

[JirinPanthosa]

Well, for one it's 'The Voice', not 'The Songwriting'. If you do win a reality competition like The Voice you're locked into a restrictive contract where you have no real control. They don't know how to write songs, so if they get a contract they are completely reliant on songs written by Berklee School of Music graduates bought by their labels, and they're not going to give them their A material until they're proven. And why spend your best material on some TV show winner when you can just find some vocalist off the street whose image you can control however you want?

So what tends to happen is, people fall in love with some singer based on their great rendition of a legendary pop song, then later when they're singing label supplied B material they don't have the same charm.

Is it possible for these people to attain legendary status? Of course, but they probably aren't going to do it through the contracts they get from the show. Although I wouldn't be shocked if five years from now Cassadee Pope pulled it off.

This is also why it's difficult for anybody who writes their own music to attain higher status than the bigger indie bands like The National or Arcade Fire. Big labels don't want to spend a lot of money on somebody whose image they can't control.

As for my opinion of the show, it is an entertaining distraction.

 

[intrinsical]

Interestingly, there's now a "The Songwriter" reality competition in China that starts off like The Voice, with the songwriter singing his or her own song to a panel of judges with their backs turned. The winner walks away with a set of arranged, polished songs ready to be sold as an album.

My take is if you're going to join The Voice, you first need to be very clear what you want out of it and have a plan in place. If its just for exposure, I'll say forget it. Unless you made it to the finals (and won), the public is fickle and that exposure does not last long. Case in point, you've probably forgotten the names Ria Eaton, Ddendyl, DeShawn Washington and Josh Murleyby by now even though they were contestants of the latest season of The Voice.

As much as I dislike Simon Cowel, he had it right that you need an X-Factor to make it as a celebrity singer. Its not just about having a good voice, although that is certainly a basic criteria. You also need to have a pretty face and a likeable on screen personality. If you have those AND your plan is to try and launch a career in country or pop, then perhaps The Voice is a good platform.

 

[Melakon]

I've not seen any of the talent competition "reality" shows, but they're not too much different from Major Bowes' Amateur Hour on radio, and Ted Mack's Original Amateur Hour on radio and television.

Out of the handful of people who became nationally famous after appearing on the show was a skinny fellow named Frank Sinatra.

 

[gblews]

So I was talking with my friend a couple of days ago about how hard it is for a musician to have a shot at making music their career even if they have a lot of talent and I'm not talking riches and fame, I mean just making a decent living. I've heard that it used to be a least a little easier a few decades ago but I digress.

A few decades ago, the only way a person made in the pop music business was to be "discovered" by some weasely record company exec or lacky and then be signed into indentured servitude by that record company and hope your irst album had at lease one hit. Today, one can develope a following through exposure on youtube or other streaming site, or social media like Facebook, and avoid altogether the need to appeal to some lowlife record company shark. It is SO much easier to get started in music than it was a few decades ago.

The main problem it seems is once a contestant is done they're forever tarnished by the fact that they've been on the show, they'll never be able to disassociate themselves from it completely and therefore will never be respected in the same way as say Jimi Hendrix or Freddie Mercury *even* if (high standards I know) they had similar songwriting and performing talent.

These days, more than at any other time, making it in music is more about grass roots appeal to the buying public than to a record company, critic or other musicians. The public doesn't care about where musicians started, be it American Idol, The Voice or any of the others. You think country fans care (or maybe even remember that Carrie Underwood won A.I.) The public responds to musicians who entertain.

Obviously the best way is to do it without having to even go there but like I said it's so difficult, especially with the industry as it is (That is, so much awful music everywhere). So what do you think? Would you listen to a former reality TV star if their music was to your taste or would you immediately think less of them the moment you found out they'd been there?

I would listen to anyone's music that appealed to me regardless of where, or how they got their start. The problem with the vast majority who fade into obscurity after their reality/competition career ends is likely becuase they didn't produce hits (whether original songs or covers). These days you need hits to generate ticket sales to your live shows because hardly anyone makes money from selling recorded music anymore.

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

Carly Smithson was the sixth place finalist on the seventh season of American Idol, but I only know that from reading up on her after the fact.

She joined up with Ben Moody, Rocky Gray & John LeCompt, all three of whom were on the first Evanescence album.

They're called We Are The Fallen and Carly is frickin' amazing in the band, with Ben's great writing.

 

[Marc]

Well, for one it's 'The Voice', not 'The Songwriting'. If you do win a reality competition like The Voice you're locked into a restrictive contract where you have no real control. They don't know how to write songs, so if they get a contract they are completely reliant on songs written by Berklee School of Music graduates bought by their labels, and they're not going to give them their A material until they're proven. And why spend your best material on some TV show winner when you can just find some vocalist off the street whose image you can control however you want?

So what tends to happen is, people fall in love with some singer based on their great rendition of a legendary pop song, then later when they're singing label supplied B material they don't have the same charm.

Is it possible for these people to attain legendary status? Of course, but they probably aren't going to do it through the contracts they get from the show. Although I wouldn't be shocked if five years from now Cassadee Pope pulled it off.

This is also why it's difficult for anybody who writes their own music to attain higher status than the bigger indie bands like The National or Arcade Fire. Big labels don't want to spend a lot of money on somebody whose image they can't control.

As for my opinion of the show, it is an entertaining distraction.

And you're probably find that songs that winner gets to release on their CD would have been recorded regardless of who ever one i.e they are just written and not tailored in any way to suit the style of the singer.

 

[Aragorn]

When it comes to The Voice, the show is pretty hands-off with the winners after the season ends (people suspect Mark Burnett only cares about the actual show itself, and not anything outside of it), and it seems like Universal Republic treats them like an obligation unless they're signed with the Nashville label. The two country winners have gotten a push. The other winners seem to get swept under the rug. The winner from two seasons ago had her album released recently to almost no fanfare.

 

[JayOwl]

Thanks to everyone for the replies! Sorry I took a while to reply, I've been away and I hate typing long messages on my phone.

A few decades ago, the only way a person made in the pop music business was to be "discovered" by some weasely record company exec or lacky and then be signed into indentured servitude by that record company and hope your irst album had at lease one hit. Today, one can develope a following through exposure on youtube or other streaming site, or social media like Facebook, and avoid altogether the need to appeal to some lowlife record company shark. It is SO much easier to get started in music than it was a few decades ago.

That's true but there's also a lot more competition, lots of people do just that, use social media to promote themselves. If you were an amazing guitarist in the 60s for example and actively pursuing a career you'd likely be in demand as a session player at least. I'll concede that it's much easier to start your own fanbase and even make a few self released sales (if you're organised put in high ticket offers of signed CDs, handwritten lyrics, Skype calls, even concerts) but that's an unreliable living, meaning you'd need to find a 2nd 'proper' job in the meantime. Labels are still needed for the promotion and they're just as controlling, especially for winners of talent competitions.

Interestingly, there's now a "The Songwriter" reality competition in China that starts off like The Voice, with the songwriter singing his or her own song to a panel of judges with their backs turned. The winner walks away with a set of arranged, polished songs ready to be sold as an album.

That sounds really cool, I'd watch something like that. I'm guessing ratings wouldn't be so great mind you because there are no popular hits.

Well, for one it's 'The Voice', not 'The Songwriting'. If you do win a reality competition like The Voice you're locked into a restrictive contract where you have no real control. They don't know how to write songs, so if they get a contract they are completely reliant on songs written by Berklee School of Music graduates bought by their labels, and they're not going to give them their A material until they're proven. And why spend your best material on some TV show winner when you can just find some vocalist off the street whose image you can control however you want?

So what tends to happen is, people fall in love with some singer based on their great rendition of a legendary pop song, then later when they're singing label supplied B material they don't have the same charm.

Is it possible for these people to attain legendary status? Of course, but they probably aren't going to do it through the contracts they get from the show. Although I wouldn't be shocked if five years from now Cassadee Pope pulled it off.

This is also why it's difficult for anybody who writes their own music to attain higher status than the bigger indie bands like The National or Arcade Fire. Big labels don't want to spend a lot of money on somebody whose image they can't control.

As for my opinion of the show, it is an entertaining distraction.

Makes sense... I hate the industry.
Of course that means that the singer needs to take more control if they feel the songs they're given are no good, even if that means leaving the label. They should really make a contribution towards co-writing them at least. But then why would the label bother giving out B material to anyone, if they gain from the success off all of their contracts? Wouldn't dropping the contract be more beneficial for them rather than dragging out a mediocre LP before dropping them?

Also, don't Arcade Fire write themselves? The songs are credited to the names of the band members.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

Yeah, most of the guys on indie labels write their own stuff.

If you look at all the really popular bands from the 1960s through the 1990s, and then look at the ones that are still considered good. Almost all of the ones that get remembered write their own songs. The Beatles (After their first two or three albums), Nirvana, Michael Jackson (50%), Bruce Springsteen. Most of the ones who just sing what the record company gives them get forgotten after the fad ends.

(Preemptively: Yes, there are exceptions. Madonna, etc.)

 

[bigdaddy]

American Idol, while the ratings have fallen is the only show that has ever, and still sometimes makes people famous, even if they don't win.

So I don't really see what the issue is.

 

[gblews]

Yeah, most of the guys on indie labels write their own stuff.

If you look at all the really popular bands from the 1960s through the 1990s, and then look at the ones that are still considered good. Almost all of the ones that get remembered write their own songs. The Beatles (After their first two or three albums),

Just to clarify, only the Beatles second American album contained multiple covers. The songs on their first and third American releases were nearly all originals.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

American Idol, while the ratings have fallen is the only show that has ever, and still sometimes makes people famous, even if they don't win.

So I don't really see what the issue is.

Of course, American Idol actually promoted its winners.

 

[Mojochi]

Talent shows have existed long before this modern incarnation of more "Reality tv" based ones. It's still the same though

Star Search, hosted by Ed McMahon served up early performances from Britney Spears, Justin Timberlake, Beyoncé, Alanis Morrisette, Christina Aguilera... And in comedy, Drew Carey, Norm McDonald, Martin Lawrence, Rosie O'Donnell, & Dave Chapelle

What you do to get a career is never as important as what you do with one. People don't even remember their beginnings on that show now, and whatever your foot in the door of beginning the social networking that builds a successful career is, you have to be ready to take advantage of it

Being successful or famous in an entertainment medium is almost never solely about how talented someone is anyhow. It's about how well they negotiate the social landscape

 

[bigdaddy]

American Idol, while the ratings have fallen is the only show that has ever, and still sometimes makes people famous, even if they don't win.

So I don't really see what the issue is.

Of course, American Idol actually promoted its winners.

But the losers a lot of the time are bigger than the winners.

 

[Mojochi]

I think in that case, the people who succeed the best are doing so because there is a solid fan base for their niche, and they work well at keeping it after the TV appearance, even if they lost. Winning the show is easier in some ways, because the winner is drawing upon the show's fan base to vote for them. Once the show viewers are removed from the equation, the draw is drastically reduced. It's up to them alone to draw in fans, and the American Idol viewers are not a given. It's a misleading notion to believe the most popular amongst viewers will be so in the real wold of the music industry

 

[Aragorn]

I think in that case, the people who succeed the best are doing so because there is a solid fan base for their niche, and they work well at keeping it after the TV appearance, even if they lost. Winning the show is easier in some ways, because the winner is drawing upon the show's fan base to vote for them. Once the show viewers are removed from the equation, the draw is drastically reduced. It's up to them alone to draw in fans, and the American Idol viewers are not a given. It's a misleading notion to believe the most popular amongst viewers will be so in the real wold of the music industry

There was a singer this past season on The Voice who was a YouTube sensation with millions of followers, but that didn't translate to those followers (who were used to getting her stuff for free) actually paying for her music.

 

[Taylirious]

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/taylor-swift-joins-voice-as-729344?utm_source=twitter

Taylor Swift has reportedly joined The Voice as the universal adviser

Don't know if this helps or what?