View Full Version : Actual Musical Talent, is it needed?
clucas91
16 Oct 2002, 17:09
Funny how many of the pop stars of today have the killer combination on looks AND talent...
Will actual talent get you anywhere if you look like a dogs breakfast?
McAlmanac
16 Oct 2002, 17:14
Tim Rogers
AlfAndrews
16 Oct 2002, 17:24
Originally posted by clucas91
... Will actual talent get you anywhere if you look like a dogs breakfast?
Not a chance these days.
I was watching a special on Janis Joplin the other day and it occurred to me that there is absolutely no way in the world that she could have made it if she was just starting out today.
Janis had one of the biggest voices in the history of rock. Personally, I don't like that style of singing but she was bloody good at what she did.
Janis, unfortunately, was no oil painting. In fact, she looked a bit like a "dog's breakfast" even BEFORE she got into smack. In these days of "Popstars"-style girl bands and boy bands she would not have got past the cattle call.
Another great singer from the same era was Mama Cass. She looked like she ate the dog's breakfast ... and then when she finished that, ate the dog as well. Again ... no chance in today's world.
To make it in the music industry today you need to be:
1. Young
2. Female ... or as close as possible.
3. Anorexic
4. Stupid ... or at least capable of pretending to be.
5. Willing to screw your way to the top.
Macca19
16 Oct 2002, 19:11
Originally posted by McAlmanac
Tim Rogers
He aint a 'pop' star tho is he?
------------------------------------------
To be a female pop star you need two things:
1) A gorgeous face with beautiful hair with a hot body with a top arse, tanned flat stomach and reasonable sized breasts
2) The ability to dance and move your mouth up and down to give the impression of singing/talking
Singing talent, musical ability, writing ability is not needed as record companies get different people to sing for you and different people to write songs/music for you.
All you need to do is look hot and be able to dance a bit.
And thats the reason why i havent listened to the radio and watched minimal music shows for the last three years.
Stealth bomber
16 Oct 2002, 19:22
I play drums, and dabble in bass guitar, guitar and keyboards. I compose, arrange, record and produce, at least at an amateur level, although I believe I could be part of something professional if I really applied myself and got in with the right people.
Had I been born 20 years earlier than I was (1977), I believe that I would probably have had a much better chance of making it with a band and have been moderately successful.
But today, I have no chance, and I probably won't even try. Because I'm male, in my 20s, and not particularly good looking or sexy, and I don't like music that sounds like Motorace or Silverchair.
Originally posted by Macca19
1) A gorgeous face with beautiful hair with a hot body with a top arse, tanned flat stomach and reasonable sized breasts
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
And thats the reason why i have watched minimal music shows for the last three years.
There is something wrong with you. ;)
Macca19
16 Oct 2002, 19:49
Originally posted by Stocka
There is something wrong with you. ;)
lol. :D
Go to their websites instead...pictures, and they dont pretend to be able to sing!
All the above makes me love The Corrs even more!!! Not only do they write there own stuff, play the drums, violin and guitar...but all three of them a FREAKING HOT!!!!
Rusty Brookes
17 Oct 2002, 09:18
Even this so called New Rock (the Vines, White Stripes) seems to be full of skinny, young things.
Give me Antiseen or Poison Idea anyday-big fat, tatooed bearded guys who rock like there's no tomorrow rather than these whiny teenage anorexics who look like they couldn't punch their way through a wet paper bag.
Desredandwhite
17 Oct 2002, 09:32
Originally posted by jod23
All the above makes me love The Corrs even more!!! Not only do they write there own stuff, play the drums, violin and guitar...but all three of them a FREAKING HOT!!!!
:D
and speaking strictly from a heterosexual male point of view, the brother is not unattractive either, if you happen to be inclined that way.
How can 3 sisters from the one family all be that attractive? I bet you there's one sister who unluckily copped all the ugly genes who they keep locked up in the basement :D
Sometimes I think I shouldn't post early in the morning when my "good taste and decency" filter isn't awake yet.
RogerMellie
17 Oct 2002, 16:29
Originally posted by jod23
All the above makes me love The Corrs even more!!! Not only do they write there own stuff, play the drums, violin and guitar...but all three of them a FREAKING HOT!!!!
There is no way in hell that The Corrs' brand of dull, by-the-numbers pop would enter the public consciousness if the gals in the band didn't look the way they do.
Originally posted by Desredandwhite
:D
and speaking strictly from a heterosexual male point of view, the brother is not unattractive either, if you happen to be inclined that way.
How can 3 sisters from the one family all be that attractive? I bet you there's one sister who unluckily copped all the ugly genes who they keep locked up in the basement :D
Sometimes I think I shouldn't post early in the morning when my "good taste and decency" filter isn't awake yet.
Im a big fan of the Corrs!!!
There so fine! oh and there music is alright :D
The Hitman
18 Oct 2002, 06:41
Originally posted by jod23
Im a big fan of the Corrs!!!
There so fine! oh and there music is alright :D
And it's that mentality in so-called music fans which promotes the money hungry record companies to sign the likes of Holly Vallance instead of "real" musicians.
Holly Vallance got three ARIA nominations. That says it all for me about this industry. However, George have made it to the top in this induustry and they are hardly good looking. Their music tells the story. I'm not the biggest fan, but I'll give them that. Alex Lloyd isn't pretty either.
The Hitman
Originally posted by jod23
Im a big fan of the Corrs!!!
There so fine! oh and there music is alright :D
Personally I think the girls from Skulker are more attractive, especially Greer. Very nice, and a great voice as well.
Blues_Brat
18 Oct 2002, 20:47
Originally posted by DEVO
Personally I think the girls from Skulker are more attractive, especially Greer. Very nice, and a great voice as well.
Mmmm Batti..
Originally posted by Stealth bomber
Had I been born 20 years ago, I believe that I would probably be, at the very least, moderately successful in the industry...... I'm male, in my 20s
so if you were just a few years younger, you'd be really successful? :D
nope, musical talent is now no longer a must to succeed :(
but those with musical talent (Led Zeppelin, Queen, Jimi etc,.) will be much longer remembered then those without (Holly Vallence, DJ {enter stupid name here} etc,.)
CowboyFromHell
18 Oct 2002, 23:26
Yeah, no musical talent is needed anymore, and it's a damn shame.
There are so many bands/individuals who become famous from one song because they look good, or because someone wrote and composed it for them, while bands with real talent strive day in, day out to make it and fall short all the time because people like Holly Valance have a nice face and a good body. It's ludicrous!
Stealth bomber
19 Oct 2002, 00:49
Oops.
20 years earlier. Earlier.
Of course, that means I'd be 45 now, which would kinda suck.
AlfAndrews
19 Oct 2002, 02:12
Originally posted by Stealth bomber
Oops.
20 years earlier. Earlier.
Of course, that means I'd be 45 now, which would kinda suck.
I wonder how you'll feel about that in 20 years time.
One thing that's gotta be said for getting old ... it's better than the alternative.
Mooster7
19 Oct 2002, 18:10
Originally posted by AlfAndrews
I wonder how you'll feel about that in 20 years time.
One thing that's gotta be said for getting old ... it's better than the alternative.
Ah, yes, the 'traveling relative age window phenomenon.' Above and behind. When you start to break into the next age decade, the fellows 10 years ahead of you suddenly don't seem so old. Those 10 years behind seem like complete idiots. You don't remember being that stupid "back then." You and your peers also 'wear your age' much better than the people before you did.
If you want to break out of this, wait until you're 30. Then have a conversation with someone in your field who has 10-20 years more experience than you do. Next, go hit on a 17 year old girl. After that, just sit back and let the reality roll in.
Possumisagun
19 Oct 2002, 22:53
Originally posted by CowboyFromHell
Yeah, no musical talent is needed anymore, and it's a damn shame.
The Sex pistols proved that you haven't needed musical talent to be successful for a long time.
CowboyFromHell
19 Oct 2002, 22:59
Originally posted by Possumisagun
The Sex pistols proved that you haven't needed musical talent to be successful for a long time.
That may be one compared to the millions we now see daily!
AlfAndrews
20 Oct 2002, 00:46
Originally posted by Possumisagun
The Sex pistols proved that you haven't needed musical talent to be successful for a long time.
BOLLOCKS !
[i]Had I been born 20 years earlier than I was (1977), I believe that I would probably have had a much better chance of making it with a band and have been moderately successful.[/B]
I started professionally in 1973 and "retired" in 1996, let me tell you......nothing has changed :)
and my forebares said the same thing to me when I was 18 or 19.