American Idol 2007

[Guest Wynne Jessal]

Yay! It's American Idol time again!

 

I have a workmate who auditioned in Seattle but, uh.. didn't make the cut. She's actually a really good singer (would I lie?) but she's pretty manic. And she choked when they asked her to sing a different song. The producers that is. She didn't get to Randy/Paula/Simon.

 

I must say, tomorrow's show from Seattle does look frightening! I'm afraid! :shock:

 

Seems like the last few shows they've showed a lot more of the rejects than the good singers. I guess they figured that's what people want to see in those first few episodes.

 

Anyone you saw from tonight that you liked? (Granted they only showed, like 4 good singers...)

[SBoydW]

why must this show continuously plauge me!?!?!?! has anyone good actually come out of it?

[Guest Wynne Jessal]

Well, it depends on how you define "good."

 

Good success: Many of the artists have had commercial success afterwards.

 

Good talent: There are undoubtedly talented people on the show. It depends on what genre you like.

 

Kelly Clarkson is a multi-grammy winner (among other awards), 7x platinum over 2 albums. Ruben Studdard was nominated for a Grammy. Carrie's album is 5x platinum, and she's won CMAs and AMAs. Other non-winners like Clay Aiken, Josh Gracin, and Chris Daughtry have had great success in their genres.

 

And let's not forget "From Justin to Kelly"!

 

Well, I imagine you're being facetious anyways, so...

 

I like the show. I like listening to the talent first off. The weird personalities that come out are secondary.

[Mat Cauthon]

I hate American Idol, give me my Lost and I will be good. A bunch of (mainly) pop singers doesn't interest me in the least.

[Guest Wynne Jessal]

Not to make anyone seem ignorant, but there are increasingly more genres represented. Last season's winner was mainly classic rock/soul, and the year before that country... In fact the only actual "pop" winner was Kelly Clarkson.

 

A lot of the competition weeks after the top 12 are themed weeks, like Broadway and assorted singers (Elvis, Stevie Wonder, etc.)

 

But, I think it just makes people feel cooler to say "Oh, I can't stand that American Idol crap." Just like people feel more "hep" going on about how Microsoft is evil and only chumps use Windows.

[Silver]

Microsoft is evil, but still user friendly. thats how the Dark side always is, easier to learn and use than the Light side. hell, i use Windows too :P

[SBoydW]

I might have gained some respect for the show if Daughtry had won, like most everyone who I talked to said would win.

[Guest Emperor]

*Sigh*

 

This would have been a great topic at DM's home for Entertainment, the Seanchan org.

 

Matt we have Lost discussions all the time when the show is on TV.

[Downfall]

William Hung ftw! :D

[Guest Yveva]

Hey Wynne :)

 

I admit, I have nevereverevereverever been interested in American Idol. But when I lived in the UK for a year I watched "The X Factor" and got really in to it. The difference with that competition was that there were three different groups, under 25, over 25 and "groups". Each judge coached contestants from one of the groups, there was a phone/text in vote, and tehn the bottom two went head to head and the judges decided between them. Simon Cowell was there, Sharon Osborne was another judge, and some other guy was there too.

 

This is a long-winded way to say that I am willing to attempt being convinced to watch, for a while at least. I'll post a thread over on the Seanchan board if you want to stop by there, let's see if we can get more people involved in the discussion!

[Mat Cauthon]

I still am not interested in it, and I definitely wouldnt consider anything like that classic rock. I cannot believe you consider that rock. Rock needs a BAND. I have never seen any single rock artist alone and without an instrument...that totally destroys parts of what make it rock. I am more into modern rock anyways which actually has more than one member. If they had a season where they had a competition just for bands I would probably watch that. The music that is on it though isn't my style though. The 2 major styles of music are Rock and Rap and as far as I know neither of these has really been represented. It is mainly pop. Anyone can sing, but can everyine sing, play an instrument and coordinate with other members at the same time?

 

Also, earlier this year I was at a baskebtall game and the chicken little dude was there performing. He wasn't horrible, but totally not my style of music.

 

By the way, what is "hep"?

 

Also, I don't think it is the cool thing to go saying that Microsoft is crap. I believe it is true and I say it because I believe it and it IS truth honestly. I use a Mac after having used a Windows computer for most of my life. I don't agree with how Microsoft has run and is running their business, basically stealing other peoples' work and calling it their own.

 

That is a little off topic though.

[Guest Wynne Jessal]

I still am not interested in it' date=' and I definitely wouldnt consider anything like that classic rock. I cannot believe you consider that rock. Rock needs a BAND. I have never seen any single rock artist alone and without an instrument...that totally destroys parts of what make it rock. ... Anyone can sing, but can everyine sing, play an instrument and coordinate with other members at the same time?

 

Also, earlier this year I was at a baskebtall game and the chicken little dude was there performing. He wasn't horrible, but totally not my style of music.

 

By the way, what is "hep"? [/quote']

 

Well, to be fair, they don't really let the contestants bring instruments up there. Many of the contestants do play instruments (guitar, piano, harmonica, etc.), but they aren't allowed to use them on AI. Except last season they let Taylor have a brief harmonica solo in the results show of the finale (when it didn't really matter).

 

Have you ever watched Rock Star? I have friends who like that show, and don't like AI. Whereas, I am not into Rock Star. Too hardcore for me. ;-)

 

Oh man. I hated that Chicken Little kid. Hated hated hated. What was his name? Oh anyways. He was irritating. With that lisp. Grr.

 

And "hep" is an old-fashioned way of saying "hip". I was being ironic, like saying... "Gee American Idol is swell!"

[Guest Wynne Jessal]

Hey Wynne :)

 

I admit' date=' I have nevereverevereverever been interested in American Idol. But when I lived in the UK for a year I watched "The X Factor" and got really in to it. The difference with that competition was that there were three different groups, under 25, over 25 and "groups". Each judge coached contestants from one of the groups, there was a phone/text in vote, and tehn the bottom two went head to head and the judges decided between them. Simon Cowell was there, Sharon Osborne was another judge, and some other guy was there too.

 

This is a long-winded way to say that I am willing to attempt being convinced to watch, for a while at least. I'll post a thread over on the Seanchan board if you want to stop by there, let's see if we can get more people involved in the discussion![/quote']

 

Well tune in for a couple of weeks! You need to lay the long odds of who's going all the way. That's how you get hooked.

 

I'll see if I can find the thread on the Seanchan board!

[O.o Jack K5 o.O]

american idol, along with who wants to be a rock star, and any other "reality show" of this nature are catalysts in the degradation of the music industry. Granted the industry has been in a downward spiral for quite a while before AI started, but its spead up quite dramatically because of it. none of these people are artists. yes, they can sing, but all the songs they sing on the show are somone elses, and even when they get the record deal, nothing original comes out of it. This just makes americans believe that they too can become a rock star or a pop idol and make lots of money, and that frankly is not the point. music is a form of creative expression, but none of these people are creative what-so-ever. they bring no new topics or ideas into culture, and have no benifit to society. they are soley concerned with their bottom line. we should leave art to the artists, and not to people like tom delong and travis barker or kelly clarkson or clay akien (how on gods green earth did the peeping tom song get onto the radio?! thats a question harder to answer than "why do we exist?")

 

i will however accept the first season of AI. a contest to find the best singer in america. somone who can actually sing unlike britney spears or christina aguleria. but why more? they already found the bloody american idol why-tf do we need to do it again? it makes me sick to see people actually supporting this garbage.

 

needless to say if you like this show...kill yourself. if you like hearing the same BS over and over until your head almost explodes...kill yourself. if you take offense to anything ive said...kill yourself...actually if you take offense to anything...kill yourself.

 

Oh! "if you're in advertising or marketing...kill yourself!" -Bill Hicks

 

you know, the music industry is trying to crack down on people stealing "intelectual property" but what intelect has been used to produce most of it? a large majority of modern rap music is about degrading women, and having lots of money and expensive things. modern pop is either about boys, if a girl is singing, or about girls if a boy is singing. its been done...STOP! and most modern rock is the same, only whineyer and way more depressing. country is just down-right irritating, hence why i cannot say anything about modern country since i cannot get past that annoying twang they have in their voice. as far as classic country. its annoying and depressing. why do you think anyone cares about how you lost your dog, and your wife, and house, and kids...and all you want back is your dog?

 

i should probably stop now. if i dont this'll probably be a three page post, and no one wants that.

 

i have said this already, but will say it again.

 

LEAVE ART TO REAL ARTISTS!

[Guest Wynne Jessal]

LOL O.o Jack K'5 o.O

 

You seem to have an overinflated ideal of the music and entertainment industry altogether.

 

I try not to get into debates with fanatics though. Especially not in the middle of the night.

[O.o Jack K5 o.O]

hey! its the middle of the day somewhere! and im not a fantastic *snicker!* i just figure if you dont have a new or interesting idea you shouldnt waste our time. but ill never get through to most people. the american public wants the same BS over and over until their head almost explodes. i will never understand. i cant wait to die.

[Guest Wynne Jessal]

No, I take that back. Your post was so bizarre and rabid I couldn't resist staying up a little longer to craft a response. :twisted: Since I didn't get offended at your strange "kill yourself" remarks, I'm sure you won't be offended by anything I have to say below either.

 

American Idol is just a talent contest. Or a popularity contest, as some might claim, which I can't deny is often true.

 

It offers a short-cut to people who want to try to shoot to the top without the intervening years of painstakingly climbing the ladder of success.

 

When American Idol puts them at the top and gives them a recording contract after the win, well, what they do at that point is up to them. Some winners have had more success than others.

 

Why keep going season after season? Because... the same people don't audition every year. Perhaps you were not aware, but not every person in America in the allowable age group auditioned that first season. They found an "american idol", but it's not like they tested every person in the country and selected the best one. Each year there's new people. People who weren't able to travel half way across the country to the audition city last year, or maybe they had to work or go to a wedding or something, but they may actually BE able to audition this year. And they may be incredibly talented! They may not have even thought of actually pursuing a music career, but they have the talent to make it and AI gives them the quick boost into the spotlight.

 

People may thumb their noses at people taking the elevator to the top instead of the stairs, but, hey. Whatever works.

 

Yes, throughout the show the contestants sing songs that have been previously recorded by other artists. Guess what--those artists give their permission to these singers to sing their songs.

 

After the contestant wins, they go on to make their debut album and their debut album IS new material. They may write the songs, they may have songwriters. So do other artists out there. There 13 track CD may be 11 new songs and 2 re-makes. That's no different than MANY other CDs that other artists release.

 

So your claim about "nothing original" coming out of it, is just ignorance as far as I'm able to see.

 

You must be some radical ascetic... your post is a little frightening. Your demand that we kill ourselves is... pretty morbid. Um... yeah. I've never read someone's opinion who seems to be so thoroughly affronted by music in general. I fervantly hope you don't have a radio in your house.

 

You say that AI and other talent-search reality shows "just makes americans believe that they too can become a rock star or a pop idol and make lots of money, and that frankly is not the point. music is a form of creative expression, but none of these people are creative what-so-ever. they bring no new topics or ideas into culture, and have no benifit to society." I find this concept very amusing. I suppose there is a grain of truth in it, but it hasn't been relevant since the days of... traveling minstrels? The entire music industry is about making money. That's why it's called an industry. If you want to gnash your teeth about that, then fine, but don't blame reality TV. And don't be so righteous as to claim that musicians nowadays aren't artists. Who are you to say that drives and inspires them? Maybe Britney Spears really has a deeply poetic spirit and derives great satisfaction from... well, OK. Maybe not HER. In any case, the music industry that you scorn does contribute an enormous amount to society. Music itself. Amidst all their greed and power-lust, music is occasionally created too. And society is increasingly surrounding itself in that music. MP3 playing cell phones, iPods everywhere, etc.

 

Or do you find all music that is produced this decade to be equally worthless?

 

Kelly Clarkson may not write her music (maybe she does, I don't know) but she still produces music that people enjoy and it moves them. So does Clay Aiken. There are other contestants on the show that actually do play instruments, though they're not allowed to do so on AI (to level the playing field? I don't know--if they have the added talent of playing guitar or piano I think they should be allowed to).

 

Judging from your vague misspelled opinions about various genres of music today, it looks like you're just pulling the common cliches that everyone uses and passing them off as your own. Not really much I can say to that.

 

You keep bringing up how no one is doing anything new. Well, in the words of Barenaked Ladies "it's all been done before". In other words... girls have always sung about boys. Boys have always sung about girls. People always have written songs about heartbreak and lost love and found love. In the middle ages, they were writing incredibly dirty misogynistic little ditties to rival modern rap. Classical composers ROUTINELY 'borrowed' themes and motifs from their peers in their own writings. Many people, myself included, take it for a realized fact that very very VERY few people come up with truly original ideas, ESPECIALLY in art. They're all just recycling an idea someone else already had.

 

That being said, why make a fuss about it.

 

American Idol is a talent contest. They find people who are talented singers. Some more than others. America votes on who is their favorite based on the type of music and voice that America feels it wants to listen to. Sometimes, after the show ends, America decides that they don't really care about that person anymore. Well, too bad so sad for the winner. America is fickle. Next year they'll sweep in an all new cast of characters and try again. Part of the fun around the show is predicting if the winner will actually go on to have any kind of success... or not... *coughrubenstuddardcough*

 

On a final note, Christina Aquilera, obnoxious and insane as she is, IS a very talented singer... though you wouldn't tell it from a lot of the songs she produces. She has an amazing voice and range. You may not like the music she produces, I'm not a huge fan, but I'm not so foolish as to try to say that she suffers from a lack of talent.

[loki redfern]

haha reality tv. who watches that nonsense. and most modern music is so bad that you want to kill yourself, espesially the really popular stuff, ugg. any people who can sing manage to hide it behind usually hidious music, which aint good. (metal being an obvious exception). reality tv is there to make money, any minor and short lived celebrity it causes, is an accidental byproduct.

[Guest Wynne Jessal]

haha reality tv. who watches that nonsense. and most modern music is so bad that you want to kill yourself' date=' espesially the really popular stuff, ugg. any people who can sing manage to hide it behind usually hidious music, which aint good. (metal being an obvious exception). reality tv is there to make money, any minor and short lived celebrity it causes, is an accidental byproduct.[/quote']

 

Well my dear, you're mucking up too different rants.

 

Reality TV: I think short-lived celebrity IS the product it aims to create, so calling it accidental would be a misnomer. And you'd be surprised how much TV is only there to make money. Um... pretty much all of it, in fact, in one way or another. OTOH, a handful of "reality TV" stars have managed to find staying power in one limited form or another.

 

Besides, I don't see AI as "reality TV" in the same sense that "Big Brother" or "Survivor" or "The Apprentice" is. Those latter shows throw people that they know have incompatible personalities together and throw challenges at them, while dangling a carrot of thousands of dollars in their face, and hope that the sparks fly. Those shows can be interesting as character studies, or just guilty pleasures. Most of the shows are hiring models and actors instead of actual people plucked out of suburbia. But American Idol is just a talent show. Like... Star Search of old.

 

Modern Music: *shrug* I don't care what your taste in music is. If you want to claim that you are so sick of modern music that you don't listen to any of it, I'd have to call your bluff. You probably have a CD or two of something more recent than Debussy and Smetana.

[Guest Yveva]

Since Europeans first started coming to the "New World" the dream of rising from nothing to something has been a motivating myth. Farmboys becoming presidents, hardworking talented people becoming famous, etc, etc. American Idol taps in to that. In my understanding the original show (in the UK?) was called "Pop Idol" blatantly looking for a marketable pop phenomenon. When I was in the UK I was surprised to see which acts were superpopular, and many of them were manufactured bands, or even winners of former competitions.

 

Most, if not all, pop music in the United States is blatantly manufactured. Pick a pretty face to sing the words someone else wrote, create a popular act. But, in the US, that's often supressed because people prefer to believe the hardworking and talented deserving of recognition myth. Often manufactured groups lose popularity... fortunuately it's just as easy to produce another band.

 

Still, people have tolerance for shows such as AI, or even reality TV shows about pseudo-celebrities because they acknowledge that yes, the celebrity is manufactured, but yes, those 15 minutes could be yours, if you are talented and hardworking enough.

 

(ps. This'd be a great topic to continue on the Seanchan boards, after all, they're the DM Entertainment Org!)

[O.o Jack K5 o.O]

you didnt understand a single word i said did you?

 

no i do not have a radio in my house. well...i do, but its not pluged in, and if i do plug it in its because i dont feel like putting the cd into my computer. and if i do listen to radio its NPR.

 

you critized me for my spelling. how petty are you?

 

No i do not think all "music" made this past decade is worthless.

 

TOOL. not a single song they have written sounds like any other song they have written. in fact...they dont really sound like any other song written period, aside from what was on opiate...maybe. their use of sycopation, and time signatures far surpasses anything anyone else has tried to acomplish. they tackle topics that need to be addressed. how cute some girl is, or how cute some boy is is not relevant in the greater scheme of things. how you view yourself, and the world around you is. "this body, holding me, reminds me of my own mortality. embrace this moment, remember, we are eternal, and all this pain is an illusion." lets see kelly clarkson and/or her songwriters get anywhere near that profound.

 

how about a song whos lyrics make good sense just listening to them. but if you pay attention to the sylables, it follows a fibinaci sequence. do you know what that is?...if not...kill yourself. *snicker* well, unless your not a sophmore in high school yet. if you're a freshman or below, i would understand if you dont know what that is yet.

 

"black

and

white are

all i see

in my infancy

red and yellow then came to be

reaching out to me

lets me see.

there is

so

much

more that

becons me

to look through to these

infinate possibilities."

 

IF YOU HAVE SONG WRITERS, YOU ARE NOT AN ARTIST. YOU ARE A PERFORMER. THE SONGWRITERS ARE THE ARTISTS. THEY DID THE CREATING, NOT YOU!

 

and apparently these songwrites arent pretty enough to perform their own songs, so require some retard "hottie" to do it for them so they can make oodles of dollas! again, not the point to art. art is about expressing you're feelings. yes the music industry is an INDUSTRY. THEY ARE THERE TO MAKE MONEY. WHY? BECAUSE AMERICANS WILL BUY ANYTHING. AS LONG AS THEY ARE TOLD THAT THEY WANT IT.

 

I only rant like this because that is how it works. people really do want to hear about some boy kelly saw one day, or some girl that justin timberlake is trying to bed. it sickens me to know that the majority of americans really dont want somthing new. not new in a sense that it hasnt been done at some point in time, but new enough to this generation.

 

new kids on the block, followed shortly by the backstreet boys, n'sync, 98 degrees, o-town. all in the span of a few years. as opposed to hendrix/beatles ... 30 years later ... tool/dreamtheatre.

 

you even mentioned the bare naked ladies. they are talented artists that do create their own product. for the most part it is a fairly unique sound, that pleases me just on the fact that there isnt a rip-off yet. or...10000 (ie blink182 and all their flunkies) honestly how many bands are travis barker and tom delong going to make? and each one of them sounds the same as the previous.

 

thought is what creates art. real thought. the most thought that tom or travis or britney or christina or kelly or clay or who-fudgein-ever is finding the words to describe the exact same thing that somone else has, but different enough that they wont get sued. plenty of pop idols have put out two or more "albums" in one year. thats not enough time to mature as an artist. to have new ideas. to have resolved the feelings you felt that lead to writing the songs that you did.

 

...*shrug*

 

why do i bother. you wont understand. the amount of people in the world that are inteligent enough, and open minded enough to understand what im trying to say is soo miniscule that its almost indeterminable. but if you wish to try, i reccomend a healthy dose of psylicybin mushrooms...and at least one tool concert...not at the same time though. bad idea for first timers.

 

as i said above it just sickens me to know that people really do want the same BS over and over again. that most people really dont want variety. and maybe i am regurgitating this stuff because past attempts did not work. those of us that understand must press on so that everyone does. so that we all can realize that we are all one, and that there is no such thing as death.

 

of wich you reply "no, thats not right" "yea well whatever, you cant teach 'americans' anything" (sorry chuck)

[Guest Wynne Jessal]

Wow. Speaking of mind-altering hallucinogens. They, and the Internet, don't mix. Your posts are silly, but also kinda disturbing.

 

Some people are extremists. That's their choice. Some people are also xenophobic, but, hey, what are you gonna do.

 

I don't agree with your implied point that all music needs to be opening the heavens and shifting paradigms with every verse. That would be too tiresome by the time the bridge rolls around.

 

People need fluff. That's acknowledged. That's why we have Seinfeld instead of sitting in front of the TV watching flowers bloom and moose procreate and beautiful sunsets. Self-revelation with every chorus is all well and good. But the mind needs downtime, too.

 

Unless you're a Jain monk, I suppose. And I presume you're not, since you're here.

 

When I want serious contemplation, I don't turn on the radio, anyhow. The music on the radio is fun, but most of it doesn't move me the way you're speaking of. Oh sure it can be sad, and angry, often happifying. But I don't turn to FM to expand my soul. I tend to be very cynical about songs that try to force Serious Messages at me. I guess we're different there. I say this to point out that you and I apparently have a ocean of difference in what we use music for.

 

You say: "No i do not think all "music" made this past decade is worthless."

 

In turn, I never by any stretch of implication said that ALL songs in the past however-many-years are good and worth listening to and revolutionary masterpieces. Some lyrics are stupid and nonsensical... a lot of love songs in fact (Faith Hill springs to mind). Some singers make you wonder why they chose that vocation... until you see their photo I guess (I like TEB, but Stephan Jenkins is a weird choice for lead vocal... at least he writes and plays guitar).

 

Similarly, singers like Avril Lavigne are popular with the teenagers to whom her songs are aimed at (since she pretty much is one), whereas Sarah Maclachlan would be favored by women in their 20s and 30s.

 

I hate Tool. I've tried listening to it, and it's just not for me. "Hate" may be a strong word. Like I already said, I don't necessarily want some band somewhere singing to me about psychology, religion, and drugs. You see? You see how it is possible for two different people to like two different musical styles? It must be my American-style ears. They must be defunct. (At least all my teeth are in good clean order.) OTOH, I have no problem with someone else who likes that kind of music--as long as they don't walk around acting like it's the ONLY type of music worth listening to.

 

Just because a person records a song written by someone else does not mean they couldn't write a song themselves. A songwriter may not record a song because they don't want to. Maybe they can't sing. Yeah, in a lot of instances I'm sure the record label prefers to have the pretty face up there selling the CD. Oh well. Don't buy it if you don't like it. I already allowed that the music INDUSTRY is trying to make money. A person who sings makes art in their own way, whether they happen to be singing a song they made up themselves, or one someone else made up, or one someone else sang from decades ago. Some people are better at singing than writing. Or playing an instrument than writing. It doesn't make their singing talents less valid.

 

Not all music is good. Not all music is bad.

 

To drag this back on topic, American Idol evens the songwriting playing field by not having the contestants write any songs. Thus we can just listen to their vocal talents. They sing previously recorded tracks (no different than many already signed singers), and once they have a record deal, they're free to write their own songs. Even Kelly Clarkson (since we keep bringing her up) has written at least one of her hit singles. And apparently, that song appeals to a few people, since it WAS a hit single. You may find it frivolous... obviously do, in fact. But that's you. It has relevance to some people. Mostly young women.

 

In conclusion, your thinly veiled attempts to pin this on Americans as the cause of the downfall of art and civilization as you see it is too ridiculous to merit a rejoinder.

 

P.S. - If you want to be taken seriously, type like an adult. That's common sense, and the point I was making.

 

P.P.S - You mean FIBONACCI sequence? Yeah. Again, not into Tool, but I love Debussy and Satie, so I am passing familiar with the concept.

 

P.P.S. - Despite everything, this is an interesting debate. We just obviously have VERY different feelings on what music means to us.

[SBoydW]

I watched 3 episodes of the auditions... I must say this would be much better suited as a comedy show... I laughed all the way through it..

[O.o Jack K5 o.O]

i suppose the point i tried to make, but apparently was unable was that so much of the music produced these days has little to no thought put into it. just about anyone aside from the mentally handicaped could write a song about how cute somone is and how they want to be with attractive people. everyone feels that way. i use tool as my primary example because from where i stand no one puts more thought, effort and creativity into their product as those guys.

 

it just blows my mind that most people really do want more of the same stuff. i spend my time trying to find artists that are completely different than what i already have. some wind up being in similar genres like Dream Theatre is with tool, or how Bone Thugs are with Atmsophere and Brotha Ali. or how Oasis and Coldplay are quite similar. I could go for some RHCP or even stray to jam bands like Phish, SCI or Wide Spread Panic. and then theres Bela Fleck and the Flecktones.

 

notice that i can go from Psycodelic Industrial to Hip Hop to jam all the way back to real and true rock and roll. i guess i strive to find those that are over the top exceptional.

 

and no, im not a monk, but i am really and truely considering it. i hate society soo much, if you havent already noticed.

 

like i said in my orignal post AI is a catalyst for the degradation of the music industry. when you look at science and mathematics, what has been done is compunded on to try to find somthing new. AI doesnt support the attempt to create, it supports copying what has already been done. you quoted Bare Naked Ladies earlier "its all been done" yea for the most part thats true. but a lot of the ideas are taken by artists and 'looked at from a different angle, under a different light, so as to hopfully see it for the first time' they try to put their own personal twist on it.

 

i suppose we ought to agree to disagree. it was nice to have somone disagree with me. ive let out a lot of pent up rage. thanks

 

O.o

[Fantasy Fan]

Britney spears. Nuff said. Modern music is a joke.

 

 

Yes...there are some exceptions...not many tho.

 

 

The golden age of music is long gone!