Australian Idol 2nd Season [Archive]

bunsen burner

14 Jul 2004, 12:45

What are people thinking going on this show unless they are very talented, let alone at all?

Here's a few chestnuts:

- Guy can't sing. Actually, he's so bad it's ridiculous. Goes on show and is humiliated by the judges. Then has a cry about how nasty the judges were. Questions: why did he think he was any good in the first place? Why didn't his family or friends tell him he was crap? When he has watched the show before, why didn't he twig that he'd be on the end of some nasty comments?

- Girl can't sing. Girl goes in and is clearly told by judges that she is not up to it. Girl tries to explain that she wants it more than anything and is 'hungry'. Question: since when did hungry = talent?

This show should be split into two parts: The first 4 weeks should be called "The let's make a fool of ourselves show", and the remaining should be named "The Karaoke Cup".

Pantsless

14 Jul 2004, 13:20

Originally posted by bunsen burner
What are people thinking going on this show unless they are very talented, let alone at all?

Here's a few chestnuts:

- Guy can't sing. Actually, he's so bad it's ridiculous. Goes on show and is humiliated by the judges. Then has a cry about how nasty the judges were. Questions: why did he think he was any good in the first place? Why didn't his family or friends tell him he was crap? When he has watched the show before, why didn't he twig that he'd be on the end of some nasty comments?

- Girl can't sing. Girl goes in and is clearly told by judges that she is not up to it. Girl tries to explain that she wants it more than anything and is 'hungry'. Question: since when did hungry = talent?

This show should be split into two parts: The first 4 weeks should be called "The let's make a fool of ourselves show", and the remaining should be named "The Karaoke Cup".

You know who's responsible don't you.....

Parents!

Mums telling their kids they have a great voice when they warble out another crap Fox FM song...The parents say, "You're my star" and kids hear, "You're a star"...

Not my Mum..oh no..the first expression I would have learnt was TONE DEAF!

Funnily enough a girl I work with had her cousin on it last night and warbled out some shyte and Dicko and the rest bagged ger out completely..it was the chick who kept singing when they were trying to talk to her. My colleague was so glad she got slammed because she's been carrying on like a princess for years.

Zeke

14 Jul 2004, 13:54

Most of them just want to get their dial on TV, or meet a pseudo-celebrity...

They know they dont have talent, but they know if the over-react to the criticism they'll get featured on the show.

Simple as that.

AngelEyes

14 Jul 2004, 14:27

Originally posted by Scrumhalf
What did you guys make of the first episode?

http://au.i1.yimg.com/australianidol.aunz.yimg.com/2004/photos/ep1/flynn_2_ep1.jpg

:D :D :D :D :D

Fling? or Flynn? Fling! The name is just a class act in itself! Brilliant! Absolutely brilliant. Loved the range of errr talent this year.

However the little kid in Tamworth that got in....Marcia, Marcia, I agree with dicko, that was a bad call. The guy hasn't had his voice broken yet.

Some good singers got through, some shocking singers were scholded, like they should be. However I think it's more people around them telling them that they are good. those are the ones to blame for their auditions...the "My Heart Will Go On" was un-excusable. Terrible! Made the original sound decent. :p

Can't wait to see the ones in Adelaide. Should be a beauty.

:( Damn looks like I'm addicted for a second time. Note to Reality Television; I want a night off. :(

Bartholin Juice

14 Jul 2004, 15:10

Originally posted by AngelEyes
However the little kid in Tamworth that got in....Marcia, Marcia, I agree with dicko, that was a bad call. The guy hasn't had his voice broken yet.

Yep, I agree.

Eriiin

14 Jul 2004, 15:53

Originally posted by AngelEyes
Note to Reality Television; I want a night off. :(

Were you big-brothering on monday since The Apprentice wasn't on? :( haha

matts_girl

14 Jul 2004, 16:10

I hate all of the early rounds. I just want them to get to the finals.

AngelEyes

14 Jul 2004, 16:20

Originally posted by Eriiin
Were you big-brothering on monday since The Apprentice wasn't on? :( haha

The Apprentice...No actually. that is one of the ones I have failed to see this year. Addicted as always to Big Brother.

I'm not looking forward to the new Bachelor's and Survivor, as well as the Amazing Race come on, you wont be able to drag me away from the set. :(

Bresh

14 Jul 2004, 18:32

Is it just me, or is Australia searching for a Will Hung mk. II not the gayest thing in the history of Western Civilization (aside from Australian Idol itself, of course)...

Macca19

14 Jul 2004, 18:45

Originally posted by Zeke
Most of them just want to get their dial on TV, or meet a pseudo-celebrity...

They know they dont have talent, but they know if the over-react to the criticism they'll get featured on the show.

Simple as that.

You got it in one. Act like your singing extremely bad. Get jacked off at the judges comments. Create a huff. Guaranteed to be on the show.

choc_a_holic

14 Jul 2004, 22:06

I guess this years idol will be a female!

apollo_creed

14 Jul 2004, 23:29

How funny was that gangster impersanator on tonights show?

3rdEchelon

14 Jul 2004, 23:58

Originally posted by grimlock
Crap, I missed it. The first couple of episodes are the only ones worth watching.

Ha yeah, just like how my mum and i watch the show for the opposite reasons! :D

Karbassiyoon

15 Jul 2004, 10:28

bombergal so blatantly on last nights show!

Disgustipated

15 Jul 2004, 11:19

My mate Steve Amosa got through to the Sydney auditions. he was the bloke from Canberra who the three panelist said he was the best they had seen. As good a bloke as you will ever meet.

Go gettem Amo

BomberGal

15 Jul 2004, 14:45

Originally posted by Ted Pellitts
bombergal so blatantly on last nights show!

It's like he's trying to speak to me, I know it...

Roobunny

15 Jul 2004, 22:03

I couldn't believe they wouldn't let that young Conrad kid through, yes he was a bit nervous but even with a cold you could tell he had a fantastic voice and a genuine charm, as opposed to some of the himbos and bimbos that did get in...

I assume he'll get through in Sydney - at least he'd better!

Mattlowry

15 Jul 2004, 22:42

Originally posted by RooBunny
I couldn't believe they wouldn't let that young Conrad kid through, yes he was a bit nervous but even with a cold you could tell he had a fantastic voice and a genuine charm, as opposed to some of the himbos and bimbos that did get in...

I assume he'll get through in Sydney - at least he'd better!

I was also really surprised with that kid. I thought he would get in for sure and they just didnt let him go through i was pretty surprised. They let that other 16 year old kid in the other day who wasnt half as good as that guy. Its flabergasting (sorry just needed an excuse to say that word ;))

This guy is the best so far in my opinion.
http://au.i1.yimg.com/australianidol.aunz.yimg.com/2004/photos/ep2/steveamosa_ep2.jpg

choc_a_holic

15 Jul 2004, 22:52

Yeah! It was obvious that Conrad was a good singer...why didn't they let him in again? Coz he didn't realise his own voice's strength? :rolleyes:

TheBloods

15 Jul 2004, 22:56

**** - how delusional are some of these people who actually think they can sing?!?! They need to be told that they're crap so they can forget about it.

This one was hysterical and serious!! My heart didn't go on - it stopped as I died from laughter!!

http://au.i1.yimg.com/australianidol.aunz.yimg.com/2004/photos/ep2/kirstyrandell_ep2.jpg

Given some of the rubbish they take, I reckon this kid should get a go:

http://au.i1.yimg.com/australianidol.aunz.yimg.com/2004/photos/ep2/conrad_ep2.jpg

EDIT - ah yes, this is Conrad isn't it - I reckon they'll let him in and he'll be good. Can't believe the ridiculous excuse they had for not taking him!!

Karbassiyoon

15 Jul 2004, 23:29

pig nose conrad was a talentless hack.

choc_a_holic

16 Jul 2004, 00:10

Yeh Conrad is alrite, but as if that other 16yo got in instead of him!

neitz_magic

16 Jul 2004, 03:37

Originally posted by bunsen burner
Guy can't sing. Actually, he's so bad it's ridiculous.

yet he was named winner of 'Australian Idol' :rolleyes:

;)

3rdEchelon

16 Jul 2004, 04:05

Originally posted by NMWBloods
<snip>
http://au.i1.yimg.com/australianidol.aunz.yimg.com/2004/photos/ep2/conrad_ep2.jpg

EDIT - ah yes, this is Conrad isn't it - I reckon they'll let him in and he'll be good. Can't believe the ridiculous excuse they had for not taking him!!

Me thinks he could pass for being Nick Riewoldt's younger brother.

bunsen burner

16 Jul 2004, 05:40

I don't subscribe to this theory that many people know they are making a fool of themselves just to get some airtime. Sure, the guy doing Mickey and a few others, but I'm pretty certain most of the people that they show us take themselves 100% seriously.

Couldn't work out the wigga with the big clock though? At some points he looked like he was taking the pi ss and at others he looked like he was serious.

TigerCraig

16 Jul 2004, 08:32

Conrad will be their first "human interest story" (along with the guy with the 9 year old). They showed way too much of him for him to be ditched.

My guess is he has been set up to get through at least to the next stage - goes to the Sydney audition, they show that in their promos, we all watch, he gets through, bursts into tears, hugs mum - we all go "awwwww" and wipe our own tears away .:rolleyes:

3rd Grade Maggy

16 Jul 2004, 08:42

Did anyone watch Mondo Thingo last night? They had a bit about the Anti Idol show they've got going on in America. Basically it is all a hoax and they pick the worst singers and put them into the finals. The audience and the judges are in on the joke but the singers actually think they are all that .... it's hilarious TV, the snippets I saw. Like that fake wedding show on earlier in the year ....

Pornstar

16 Jul 2004, 11:56

Originally posted by Bresh
Is it just me, or is Australia searching for a Will Hung mk. II not the gayest thing in the history of Western Civilization (aside from Australian Idol itself, of course)... No you are not alone. It was painfully contrived. If Hung never existed it would have been hilarious, but it was just embarassing.

I am sick to death of the Craig David voice gymnastic male singers that keep getting through. Same old, same old. Yawn.

Roobunny

21 Jul 2004, 09:09

Ah the girl standing there with the headphones on just totally ignoring the judges while she screamed along is possibly my favourite ever stupid auditionee... and the way she was so surprised that she "looked weird"

bunsen burner

21 Jul 2004, 10:30

I like when idiots talk themselves up before they go in, then do a shocking performance and can't accept the judges decision. Maybe when they sing to themselves, their ears are hearing the real thing rather than their own voice?

choc_a_holic

21 Jul 2004, 22:07

Originally posted by bunsen burner
I like when idiots talk themselves up before they go in, then do a shocking performance and can't accept the judges decision. Maybe when they sing to themselves, their ears are hearing the real thing rather than their own voice?

Yeah, I agree, I think when u sing u actually hear something different when you hear urself taped...or maybe they haven't cleaned out the wax from their ears lately!

Karbassiyoon

21 Jul 2004, 22:37

I can't believe they let pignose conrad through.

holc

22 Jul 2004, 13:28

jeeez they should have just named it 'Polynesians in Australia' Idol.

And yeah im sick to death of these ******** guys who sing like girls. Are there any real men singers left???

Bartholin Juice

22 Jul 2004, 13:32

Originally posted by holc
jeeez they should have just named it 'Polynesians in Australia' Idol.

And yeah im sick to death of these ******** guys who sing like girls. Are there any real men singers left???

That's the sort of singer they're after.

bunsen burner

22 Jul 2004, 13:40

I thought that guys rendition of that Darkness song was quite good, but it's clear that he isn't what they're after - and fair enough. It's not just about talent. It's more about being talented enough to sing covers whilst being appealing to... you guessed it, the teenage girl market.

Squeak

22 Jul 2004, 14:19

Originally posted by bunsen burner
I thought that guys rendition of that Darkness song was quite good, but it's clear that he isn't what they're after - and fair enough. It's not just about talent. It's more about being talented enough to sing covers whilst being appealing to... you guessed it, the teenage girl market.

They let that bloke through in the end, as they let him have a go at a non-falsetto rock song, which he did quite well. I'll peg him for at least top 30 going by what the standard has been like.

bunsen burner

22 Jul 2004, 14:24

Originally posted by Squeak
I'll peg him for at least top 30 going by what the standard has been like. Although I'm not really into it (mainly watch it for a laugh), the standard was pretty ordinary.

brampta

22 Jul 2004, 19:27

Originally posted by RooBunny
Ah the girl standing there with the headphones on just totally ignoring the judges while she screamed along is possibly my favourite ever stupid auditionee... and the way she was so surprised that she "looked weird"

hahahahhahhaha yeah I remember that bit - what a belter!

Karbassiyoon

22 Jul 2004, 19:49

there's no point producing somebody who can sing like the darkness, when there's already the darkness.

and same with that guy dicko let through only on looks. hello - did somebody say a slightly darker guy sebastian? hey let's produce 2 flops in a row...but at least they'll look exactly the same so it's a formula we're comfortable with.

hopefully a chick wins this one.

Scrumhalf

22 Jul 2004, 20:52

I liked that Samoan singer who performed the whole lot - survivor, the Haka, etc.

:D

Richmondfan#1

22 Jul 2004, 21:31

bunsen burner

22 Jul 2004, 21:42

Originally posted by Ted Pellitts
there's no point producing somebody who can sing like the darkness, when there's already the darkness.
????????????????

Do you realise what you just said? That's like saying the rest of them shouldn't get through because there's already a [insert name of the artist who's song they covered].

I'd say they originally thought that there was really no point in putting him through because they new his genre of music and image was not what their audience (predom teenage girls) wanted.

and same with that guy dicko let through only on looks.Maybe you don't understand the manufactured music industry very well. How many ugly people do you see on video hits these days? Very few. How many prefabricated bands/artists have ugly people in them? Very few. That part of the industry is as much about looks than talent.

hey let's produce 2 flops in a row...The first one was hardly a flop. I'm pretty sure it sold well - and that is the primary idea.

hopefully a chick wins this one. Why?

bunsen burner

22 Jul 2004, 21:47

Originally posted by Richmondfan#1
God yeah! Every darker skinned guy or gal that walks in, Marcia loves. Fact.And starts with extra doses of the sister/brother routine like she automatically has some sort of link with them. What a joke.

And we don't wanna another ****ing Guy, arghh. Could you expect anyone better though? I'm no fan of Guy Sebastian or prefab music, but at the end of the day the talent (or lack of) pool consists of karaoke artists, most of who wouldn't have a clue how to write their own music, and most who sing really craapy/tacky r'n'b songs.

Unfortunately Guy Sebastian is as good as it gets.

Bartholin Juice

23 Jul 2004, 00:23

Originally posted by bunsen burner
Maybe you don't understand the manufactured music industry very well. How many ugly people do you see on video hits these days? Very few. How many prefabricated bands/artists have ugly people in them? Very few. That part of the industry is as much about looks than talent.

Like the girl who sang that Kasey Chambers' song and Dicko said "You're not pretty enough, not tuneful enough, and not talented enough."

On the Panel, Langbrook said something like "Who cares what she looks like? Why did he say that for?" You're not fooling anybody with the hair dye, Langbrook.

Bartholin Juice

23 Jul 2004, 00:24

Originally posted by bunsen burner
And starts with extra doses of the sister/brother routine like she automatically has some sort of link with them. What a joke.

Could you expect anyone better though? I'm no fan of Guy Sebastian or prefab music, but at the end of the day the talent (or lack of) pool consists of karaoke artists, most of who wouldn't have a clue how to write their own music, and most who sing really craapy/tacky r'n'b songs.

Unfortunately Guy Sebastian is as good as it gets.

There was that guy who came on and told them he could play a few instruments and write for a few instruments. Pity he couldn't sing.

As for Guy - from what I heard, he can and does write his own material, but I don't think any of it found its way onto his album.

bunsen burner

23 Jul 2004, 11:05

Originally posted by Bartholin Juice
Like the girl who sang that Kasey Chambers' song and Dicko said "You're not pretty enough, not tuneful enough, and not talented enough."

On the Panel, Langbrook said something like "Who cares what she looks like? Why did he say that for?" You're not fooling anybody with the hair dye, Langbrook.

She's got a point but I don't think she sees it from the right perspective.

Looks should not matter when it comes to talent or the success of an artist. But for the prefab teenage girl music market, it does matter. And that really shows how little credibility this genre of music has.

It is what it is: Record producers are interested in money - prepubescent girls want sugar coated shallow music packaged in good looking artists and film clips - record producers find and manufacture what teenyboppers want - teenyboppers go out and buy singles. I only get annoyed when people pass this fluff off as talent.

Really Kate should have just said the fact that you have to be good looking to be a successful artist in that demographic shows that it has little cedibility.

bunsen burner

23 Jul 2004, 11:09

And while on the subject of that pc agenda pushing woofer Kate Langmuck, what's her problem with people using the word 'panties'. She's forever complaining about it and saying that it is only guys who use it and no girls use it as it is some sort of pervy dirty word.

Dear Kate,

If 'panties' is not a word used by females and a word that should never be used, then why are there female products called 'panty liners'?

Regards,
Bunsen

I might send that in to the panel.

Bartholin Juice

23 Jul 2004, 13:09

Originally posted by bunsen burner
She's got a point but I don't think she sees it from the right perspective.

Looks should not matter when it comes to talent or the success of an artist. But for the prefab teenage girl music market, it does matter. And that really shows how little credibility this genre of music has.

It is what it is: Record producers are interested in money - prepubescent girls want sugar coated shallow music packaged in good looking artists and film clips - record producers find and manufacture what teenyboppers want - teenyboppers go out and buy singles. I only get annoyed when people pass this fluff off as talent.

Really Kate should have just said the fact that you have to be good looking to be a successful artist in that demographic shows that it has little cedibility.

I don't think it's fair to dismiss all of it as lacking talent and skill. Performing pop music still requires a decent amount of skill - it's not at the level of classical or jazz, but not much is. Most rock musicians aren't much more talented or skillful than many manufactured pop performers. Sure, they may write their own songs - but it's very easy to write a song.

I think what really strips this industry of credibility is that the level of talent and skill on show is so uniform. If you have the level of talent and skill required, the record companies will shoot you to success. But anything more than that is simply irrelevant. This is probably why we don't see many pop performers who have a lot of talent and skill - those who do, will pursue other musical interests where they have more artistic freedom.

bunsen burner

23 Jul 2004, 14:00

Originally posted by Bartholin Juice
I don't think it's fair to dismiss all of it as lacking talent and skill. Performing pop music still requires a decent amount of skill - it's not at the level of classical or jazz, but not much is. Most rock musicians aren't much more talented or skillful than many manufactured pop performers. Sure, they may write their own songs - but it's very easy to write a song.

Disagree.

Performing does require a skill, but in the context of the situation it's disrespectful to real artists to say these 'karaoke' artists are skillful. Have have friends who I would consider very skillful guitarists. They can play anything by ear note for note. But are they as skillful as the people who wrote the music they covered? Absolutely not.

There's hundreds of thousands of people who can play Eric Clapton songs note for note, but to compare their ability/skillfulness is insane. And remember, that's all these (the vast majority) prefabricated pop artists are doing - performing someone else's songs.

Very easy to write a song? Pfft! The difference between talent and pretenders in the music industry is being able to create and perform popular music rather than just perform it. HUGE HUGE difference.

I think what really strips this industry of credibility is that the level of talent and skill on show is so uniform.uniform is closely associated with lack of scarcity that can be said about the relationship between talented artists and pretenders.

Talented artists create their own music and often their own unique style. They are very scarce. However people who can't create their own style and own music but can copy others are dime a dozen.

Bartholin Juice

23 Jul 2004, 14:22

Originally posted by bunsen burner
Disagree.

Performing does require a skill, but in the context of the situation it's disrespectful to real artists to say these 'karaoke' artists are skillful. Have have friends who I would consider very skillful guitarists. They can play anything by ear note for note. But are they as skillful as the people who wrote the music they covered? Absolutely not.

There's hundreds of thousands of people who can play Eric Clapton songs note for note, but to compare their ability/skillfulness is insane. And remember, that's all these (the vast majority) prefabricated pop artists are doing - performing someone else's songs.

Very easy to write a song? Pfft! The difference between talent and pretenders in the music industry is being able to create and perform popular music rather than just perform it. HUGE HUGE difference.

uniform is closely associated with lack of scarcity that can be said about the relationship between talented artists and pretenders.

Talented artists create their own music and often their own unique style. They are very scarce. However people who can't create their own style and own music but can copy others are dime a dozen.

Performance is its own kind of skill, though - especially in regard to classical and jazz where the majority of performances are of pieces by other people. I would also say that it is quite disrespectful to people who interpret and perform the music of others by calling them "karaoke" artists. I teach classical piano, and I can assure you that there is a lot of work and detail that goes into understanding and performing a piece of music.

Obviously there's going to be cases of a great musician who writes and performs his own music. And it's fair enough to say that other people who are able to perform - but not write as good quality - the music by this great musician aren't at the same level of overall musicianship. However, who is the better musician - the person who can perform a great piece of music extremely well, or the person who can perform and write at a mediocre level?

I'm not trying to argue that these manufactured pop performers have a very high level of skill. They don't - they are merely competent at basic skills. But that is still some level of skill that is required - they aren't complete duds. Talent and skill in the industry is irrelevant more than absent.

It is, in fact, easy to write a song. Very easy. It's bloody hard to write a good song, but that doesn't change the fact that it's very easy to write a song. Writing your own music isn't what makes you a better musician than those who don't write their own music. Those classical and jazz musicians who almost entirely perform the works of others are much better musicians than most rock/pop musicians.

bunsen burner

23 Jul 2004, 15:50

Originally posted by Bartholin Juice
I would also say that it is quite disrespectful to people who interpret and perform the music of others by calling them "karaoke" artists. Not disrespectful at all. It is nothing more than glorified karaoke.

I teach classical piano, and I can assure you that there is a lot of work and detail that goes into understanding and performing a piece of music.So what?

I can play guitar. I can play almost any song I want to providing I have the tab. Yes, it's hard but you can hardly compare it to the person who created the music.

You're a piano teacher right? You would be able to play some Beethoven and make it sound almost the same right? Do you consider yourself anywhere near the same league as Beethoven?

I'll answer for you - NO! So please stop this pathetic charade and accept that cover artists/bands are not in the same league as creators of music.

However, who is the better musician - the person who can perform a great piece of music extremely well, or the person who can perform and write at a mediocre level?
Alex Lloyd > The Australian Doors Show.

I'm not trying to argue that these manufactured pop performers have a very high level of skill. Seems to me you are. Just what is your problem. This must be about the tenth time you have had a go at me without success. Why do you insist?

They don't - they are merely competent at basic skills. But that is still some level of skill that is required - they aren't complete duds. Talent and skill in the industry is irrelevant more than absent. Seems like you're backing out here.

I never said there's no skill - but their skill levels are nowhere near that of people who create and perform music.

Are you upset because you feel I have under appreciated your musicianship? If you compared yourself to Beethoven, I'd laugh at you. If you compared yourself to the average joe, I'd agree that you have talent. Since we are comparing karaoke artists with real artists in this instance you really shouldn't have a problem with my views.

It is, in fact, easy to write a song. Very easy. It's bloody hard to write a good song What did you think I was talking about? It was obvious I was talking about songs that were good.

but that doesn't change the fact that it's very easy to write a song. Writing your own music isn't what makes you a better musician than those who don't write their own music. Those classical and jazz musicians who almost entirely perform the works of others are much better musicians than most rock/pop musicians. Now you're going for the technicality.

We were comparing prefab artists with the songs they cover. How many of the songs they cover are crap songs?

Dude, you're really starting to get on my nerves. You follow me around, you start arguments with me, you back out or start changing the subject. What's your problem? You should just get off my case. Aren't you getting sick of being proven wrong every time?

Bartholin Juice

23 Jul 2004, 16:13

BB, All I'm pointing out is that writing your own songs does not automatically mean that you have a higher level of musicianship than someone who does not write their own songs.

It seems to me that you have little appreciation for the art of interpreting, understanding, and performing a piece of music. I agree with you that in the case of pop music, there's not much to be said for it - it is really just glorified karaoke. But in general, this is not the case.

No musician who performs a piece written by another would compare themselves to the composer - it's just not a reasonable comparison. But I've never claimed that it is. So we shouldn't also then claim that the person who wrote the song is automatically better than the person who merely performs it. This is not to say that we can not say which musician is better - just that we can't reach a decision based only on who wrote the piece and who merely performs. There are plenty of other factors that come into question.

As for your claim that cover artists/bands are not in the same league as people who write their own material - that is nonsense. Most classical musicians who almost exclusively play the music of others are far better musicians than a lot of musicians who write their own music.

What makes an artist "real"? Is it writing their own songs? Any bedroom guitarist can write their own songs. Is it an issue of quality, in that what you are calling a "real" musician is a good musician?

I am not backing out anywhere - you misrepresent my argument, and then accuse me of misinterpreting you (ie., when I said writing a song is easy). You also accuse me of pursuing technicalities, when all I am doing is pointing out subtleties and details which you seem to have overlooked. I don't favour your battering ram approach to an issue - things are not always so simple as they may seem.

I don't understand why you get so hot under the collar when someone disagrees with you. Did you get the PM I sent you?

Tiger Survivor

23 Jul 2004, 17:06

"Talented artists create their own music and often their own unique style. They are very scarce. However people who can't create their own style and own music but can copy others are dime a dozen."

Amen to that. I've been playing guitar for many years, can play very fast, do decent improv solos, I can also play a classic song like 'Sonic Reducer' easily, but can I actually sit down and write a song that memorable. Hell no. It's easy to cover other people's music, but being able to possess the talent to write a great song (no matter how simple) is very hard. It's a unique kind of skill that very few possess, whereas anyone who's been playing for a couple of years can get tab music and play a cover of someone's song. Classical music is different though, it's obviously harder to play than a rock or pop cover.

Bartholin Juice

23 Jul 2004, 17:28

Originally posted by Tiger Survivor
Amen to that. I've been playing guitar for many years, can play very fast, do decent improv solos, I can also play a classic song like 'Sonic Reducer' easily, but can I actually sit down and write a song that memorable. Hell no. It's easy to cover other people's music, but being able to possess the talent to write a great song (no matter how simple) is very hard. It's a unique kind of skill that very few possess, whereas anyone who's been playing for a couple of years can get tab music and play a cover of someone's song. Classical music is different though, it's obviously harder to play than a rock or pop cover.

I mostly agree with you.

But suppose that someone has just started learning guitar. They learn how to play G and D chords. They strum these one after the other, and sing (almost tunelessly) some words along with it. Presto - a song. But does this automatically make this person a better musician than you - who has good technical facility, can improvise, and so on? Of course not.

Writing a good song is damn hard, and not many people can do it. Or rather, not many people can do it consistently. I'm not entirely sure whether a good composer is a better musician than a good performer. Does rarity make something better? I'm inclined to rate a good composer higher, but I'm just not sure.

However, I don't think people who play covers are necessarily people who are only of average talent. There's a lot more to playing someone elses music than just playing the right notes - there's all the interpretation and understanding that goes along with that. Those are skills which aren't just about technical facility, but like composing music, require one to be "musical".

bunsen burner

23 Jul 2004, 17:48

Originally posted by Bartholin Juice
BB, All I'm pointing out is that writing your own songs does not automatically mean that you have a higher level of musicianship than someone who does not write their own songs.Of course not, but we were actually talking about prefab artists/acts and the songs that they cover. It was quite clear we weren't talking about Joe Brown who wrote a crap song in his bedroom and played it on his tennis racquet.

just that we can't reach a decision based only on who wrote the piece and who merely performs. In the context of what we've been discussing here, we pretty much can.

Generally prefab artists cover well known songs. As most of these prefab artists can't dreate their own music and the artist they cover do it well enough for the song to be known, we can quite easily make the assumption that the original artist has more talent.

ps please don't change the context and start mentioning when artists cover other artists: ie "well in your logic then Bob Dylan must be better than Jimi Hendrix because hendrix covered Watchtower etc"

As for your claim that cover artists/bands are not in the same league as people who write their own material - that is nonsense. Most classical musicians who almost exclusively play the music of others are far better musicians than a lot of musicians who write their own music.You're trying to change the context again.

I decided not to read the rest of your crap. We were talking about prefab artist's (ie idol contestents) talent vs. the talent of the original artists. There's pretty much no contest, but for some reason you felt you had to come on (once again) and argue a different point.

Bartholin Juice

23 Jul 2004, 17:55

BB, if you bothered to read what I've been saying, you'd realise that for the most part I agree with you. However, I thought there were some important subtleties that needed to be pointed out. But because discussing these subtleties won't result in you "winning an argument" you simply refuse to discuss them.

bunsen burner

23 Jul 2004, 18:47

Originally posted by Bartholin Juice
BB, if you bothered to read what I've been saying, you'd realise that for the most part I agree with you. However, I thought there were some important subtleties that needed to be pointed out. But because discussing these subtleties won't result in you "winning an argument" you simply refuse to discuss them. Why did the subtleties need to be pointed out? Thought they were quite obvious. You didn't point these out first though. You made a blanket disagreement of my posts and then started slipping in these subtleties.

I refuse to discuss them because you always come in and tell me I'm wrong. Why would I say "yes smartypants, I'm wrong because of all these subtleties you mention - eventhough they weren't a part of my original argument"?

As for "winning an argument"? Why is this about the tenth thread that you have come after me? Sorry champ, but there's no doubt that you yearn to prove me wrong somewhere and hence "win an argument".

Richmondfan#1

23 Jul 2004, 21:29

Originally posted by bunsen burner
Could you expect anyone better though? I'm no fan of Guy Sebastian or prefab music, but at the end of the day the talent (or lack of) pool consists of karaoke artists, most of who wouldn't have a clue how to write their own music, and most who sing really craapy/tacky r'n'b songs.

Unfortunately Guy Sebastian is as good as it gets.

Well I guess that's fair enough. Although I felt Paulini had a much better voice.

Roobunny

23 Jul 2004, 21:42

Paulini had a fantastic voice but I thought a real arrogance about her... one quote in particular springs to mind "it'll be really sad when of 'them' gets sent home this week" as if it was just so crazy that she could... I just never warmed to her.

I was a full blooded Shannon girl. And it obviously wasn't the voice (he can sing but clearly not as good as voice as Guy) but it wasn't looks either, it was the package, I thought Guy was bland and I didn't want a bland Idol

bunsen burner

24 Jul 2004, 00:09

Originally posted by Richmondfan#1
Well I guess that's fair enough. Although I felt Paulini had a much better voice. Much of a muchness. She probably did have the better voice, but compared to the whole spectrum of popular music (ie artists that sell cd's) there's not much in it and that standard is as good as it will get.

Scrumhalf

27 Jul 2004, 20:02

Bump.

Roobunny

28 Jul 2004, 09:59

I actually would rather have more shows spent on this stage of the competition than just 2. You get to hear 10 seconds of about 1 quarter of the people sing...

SaintsSupporter

28 Jul 2004, 16:56

I was kind of addicted to Big Brother too, in the 1st and 4th seasons. The 2nd one was alright, but the 3rd was just s-h-i-t, with ****ing Reggie winning it. What an embarrasment.

Paulkanga2000

2 Aug 2004, 11:04

So we are down to the final 30

http://au.australianidol.yahoo.com/contestants/top30/index.html

Who do you think will win?

Paul

TheBloods

2 Aug 2004, 11:20

At this early stage, the top five IMO are:

- Chanel Cole
- Ben Eaton
- Daniel Belle
- Ricki-Lee Coulter
- Angie Narayan

They have the best voices and some degree of personality to go with them. As for who will win, who knows what the stupid public think - after all Shannon Noll and Millsy finished in the top half dozen last time!! :confused:

bunsen burner

2 Aug 2004, 11:43

- Chanel Cole
- Daniel Belle
- Ngaiire Joseph
- Courtney Murphy
- Angie Narayan

Although she easily has on of the best voices, you'd have to rule Angie Narayan out because she's fat and ugly. She can lose all the kilo's she likes, but she's got a face like a bucket of smashed crabs.

TheBloods

2 Aug 2004, 11:59

Smashed crabs!! :eek: LOL!!

I really like Courtney Murphy's voice and I hope to see him go a long way in the competition.

Ngaiire Joseph also has a great voice and if she overcomes her shyness should do quite well.

I think this Idol group is better than the first series.

SaintsSupporter

2 Aug 2004, 13:12

Billie McCarthy has a great voice, but she's got the battle of the bulge going against her.

Noddy Holder

2 Aug 2004, 15:23

My early favourite at this stage would have to be Chanel Cole - great personality

TheBloods

2 Aug 2004, 15:28

I was a bit disappointed to see Gabriel Cabrera make it and the guy who sang "We will rock you" miss out.

mattyc2422

2 Aug 2004, 15:39

I found it funny when the chick was telling the camera to get away because she had pride, then earlier in the show she was basically giving Australia an upskirt presentation.

I'm a fan of Ngaiire Joseph. Hope she goes a long way.

Bartholin Juice

2 Aug 2004, 16:19

Originally posted by NMWBloods
I was a bit disappointed to see Gabriel Cabrera make it and the guy who sang "We will rock you" miss out.

I thought he was pretty lousy... He was trying too hard, and it was obvious that putting on a gruff voice was quite foreign to him.

Bartholin Juice

2 Aug 2004, 16:24

The best 5 I saw (I didn't see all of them):

Chanel Cole
Courtney Murphy
Billie McCarthy
Daniel Belle
Hayley Jensen

Belle - don't know what he's doing. He should stick to singing real music.

Ngaiire - horrible. Get rid of the acrobatics and just sing a damn tune.

Edit: And it was very very disturbing to see all those people crying when Gabriel performed. Excessive sentimentality should be punishable by death.

bunsen burner

2 Aug 2004, 18:04

Originally posted by mattyc2422
I found it funny when the chick was telling the camera to get away because she had pride, then earlier in the show she was basically giving Australia an upskirt presentation.
I wanted to see more of her getting the arse. She just thought she was hot. She danced in a manner that just made me want to punch her repeatedley in the face.

Good to see small poppy syndrome alive in Australia - all though she'd disagree as she would believe she is a tall poppy.

TheBloods

2 Aug 2004, 18:36

Originally posted by Bartholin Juice
I thought he was pretty lousy... He was trying too hard, and it was obvious that putting on a gruff voice was quite foreign to him.

Maybe so, but I thought Gabriel was pretty ordinary and it was just pathetic when all those over-emotional artistes started crying. Always posing, always looking for attention! :rolleyes:

Bartholin Juice

2 Aug 2004, 18:52

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Maybe so, but I thought Gabriel was pretty ordinary and it was just pathetic when all those over-emotional artistes started crying. Always posing, always looking for attention! :rolleyes:

When I saw that part I was one third disturbed, one third nauseous, and one third cynical. It was repulsive.

choc_a_holic

2 Aug 2004, 19:31

Originally posted by NMWBloods
I was a bit disappointed to see Gabriel Cabrera make it and the guy who sang "We will rock you" miss out.

I am sure his name is Don..the greek one?
All my favourites are gone!!!!!!!! :eek:

Roobunny

4 Aug 2004, 21:13

So time for pure speculation - anyone got any idea who's walked out on the top 30???

From the ad it's a guy (unless that's a clever ruse)

Paulkanga2000

5 Aug 2004, 21:06

RooBunny

It was a ruse as it was a female that quit the show

Why go all that way when you are this close to being the australian idol

I hope her and her sister don't have issues down the track in life because of it

Chanel certainly flipped out by what she read on the net eh?

As the judges said tonight it looks like a great group. Hope the aussie public makes the right choice

Paul

Black JuJu

5 Aug 2004, 21:46

Is the Chris Connolly lad still in the running?

I want him to win it.

Paulkanga2000

5 Aug 2004, 22:34

Black Juju

Yes Courtney (chis connolly lookalike) is still there.

He will be on Sunday night's show

Paul

Roobunny

6 Aug 2004, 10:20

Originally posted by Paulkanga2000
RooBunny

It was a ruse as it was a female that quit the show

Why go all that way when you are this close to being the australian idol

I hope her and her sister don't have issues down the track in life because of it

Chanel certainly flipped out by what she read on the net eh?

As the judges said tonight it looks like a great group. Hope the aussie public makes the right choice

Paul

Actually as soon as they announced it - it was like "oh yeah of course" so it was a total anti-climax!

Lady Lawrence

6 Aug 2004, 14:39

I reckon those twins will have major issues down the track!

My fave is Daniel (the classically trained guy that Dicko said couldn't sing pop but was wrong). Which means he so won't win cos no-one I ever pick in any of the "reality" shows win. Although I did pick Trev the very first episode of BB! So maybe my luck is changing!!

Bobby Giovanni

6 Aug 2004, 16:42

Ben dates and lives with a dance instructor, which just happens to be a dude. He's as fruity as Strappleberry Juicy Fruit.

bunsen burner

8 Aug 2004, 20:12

How good is this:

Idol is on in the next room and I have just seen who they brought in as the replacement for the person who left: It's the woofer who thinks she's hot and dancers like she's the hottest girl on the planet.

Can't wait to see her get cut down again. This is like two for the price of one.

Roobunny

8 Aug 2004, 22:42

Well...the first "semi" final...My thoughts...

Courtney who I really like was dressed horribly he looked like a Blues Brother who'd had a few too many nights out. I really love his voice though.

The first one Anthony (?) did a Jessica Simpson version of Angels by Robbie Williams (ie massively oversang it and removed any hint of emotion in the song).

Thrilled to see Laurence not do too well - WHY is he still there? Sometimes the judges make decisions I'll never understand.

Cannot decide what I thought of Chanel's version of Glory Box. I thought it was a really brave song choice, and she did a good job singing it, but I loathed the arrangement, she sang some parts to fast, other bits too slow...I think I just love the original version too much, oh and that thing in Chanel's hair, made me want to leap through the tv and slap her...

Hmmm - no idea who'll get through...

TheBloods

8 Aug 2004, 23:19

Anthony has a good voice, but you're right - he oversings like so many others.

Emily has a good voice and did a great performance for a 16yo.

Meri was ordinary (she's only 27!?!) and should go.

Hayley has a decent voice, but I didn't find her performance particularly appealing.

Courtney was really good - great voice.

Prinnie was just okay. Seems rather nervous.

Laurence was very ordinary - should go.

Chanel was excellent - great singer and performer.

Ngaiire's performance was rather dull. She sings in a bit of a monotone voice, although she has great potential with a very powerful voice.

Ben was okay I thought even though the judges hated it.

I didn't much of the first Idol except for the last half dozen and I reckon many of the people in this first ten were as good as most in the last half dozen.