But I think talent is less about opinion and more about fact when looking at it in sport such as football. It's like if a guy won the 100m 5 times at the olympics, he's talented without question! If an artist wins 5 brit awards, a lot of people might still think they're crap and they wouldn't sound stupid for saying it.

If someone said the guy that won gold 5 times at the olympics was "crap" that would be pretty stupid so do you see what I mean?

Talent IS subjective in all things, but more so in certain areas, music being one of those areas...

I agree talent is subjective but I feel people should look at it with a more objevtive eye. Take Elton John for instance. What do you think of him? An artist does not stay in the music industry for 30-40 years unless they're abundantly talented. And, he is one of the most talented singer/pianist/songwriters ever. I wonder how many people would acknowledge it as his music is not exactly cutting edge. I feel people should put they're personal beliefs to one side and appreciate any talented individuals that come along.

Talent is not subjective - opinion is. I find Leona's songs boring, and would not spend any money on buying her music. She has a great voice though.

I love the Rolling Stones, but Mick Jagger does not have a technically great voice - he says that himself. But his voice is brilliant for the kind of music he makes. He is a supremely talented lyricist though.

Technically, Leona has a far better voice than Jon McClure, of Reverend and the Makers - I just prefer their music.

Then does she really have a 'better' voice? People say she has, that's the media ideal, but is it better? As you say, you prefer other bands and their singers... You say 'technically', does this mean you think Leona is better because she can sing more octaves?!

Mariah carey can sing 5 octaves (apparently) but I think she sounds like a strangled cat. I can't bear her voice for more than about 2 seconds without projectile vomiting.

Would you really rather they sang a rolling stones song- because you say her voice is better but the songs are not. Fact is, Leona could never sing anything other than pop drivel, it's all her voice suits, just my opinion of course.
...

And GiRth, no I don't like Elton John and I don't think he's all that talented either. Maybe he was in the 70's (not sure) but all the songs of his I've heard over the last 10/ 15 years have been absolute crap.

And I don't think longevity is determined by talent alone. Were the spice girls really that talented? Yet they were around much longer than other far more talented acts.

Sometimes it’s about being in the right place at the right time, working hard, having the correct image, having the money to back it, having the confidence etc… In fact, what I’d call talent is probably pretty low on what you need to become a successful artist these days.

What I was trying to say was that talent cannot be quatified and thus becomes quite a subjective entity. Leona is extremely talented given her incredible vocal range but her dull music taint many people opinions on her talent.

People can like what they want and buy what they want. Leona's talent should be based any one persons like or dislike for her music. I feel her talent should be acknowledged even by people who dont like her music.

Have the Spice girls been around for thirty years? Talent in the music injdustry can most definitely be measured by longevity. Neil young, Prince, Elton John, Bruce Springsteen, Madonna these are all artists who have been around for over 25 years did they do that by being in the right place at the right time?

It can be, I didn't say it couldn't, I just said there is often more to it. Longevity isn't based on talent 'ALONE'.

And no, the spice girls weren't around 30 years but you missed the point. They were STILL around far longer than other acts with arguably more talent.

And I don't think a lot of Madonnas talent is in her music. She creates an image and always seems to be doing the right thing at the right time, her voice is arguably pretty crap.

In the music business longevity is the key to talent. The artist I mentioned especially Neill Young and Springsteen have remained at the top due to their talent alone. They have no image or anything like that to play with.

The Spice Girls reformed for the money. The lack of success of the tour speaks volumes. It seem their fans have moved on but the girl still want to do the old tunes because they have nothing more to give. That's one of the reason the tour has been a bit of a failure ie the girls LACK of talent.

Your right. Madonna does create an image but there is usually quality music to go with the new image. She is the blue print for the modern artist. She's shown that talent is not the be all and end all but talent does breed longevity.

GiRth, you can't deny the spice girls were popular for a loooong time in the 90's, more so than most pop acts seem to manage these days. Nothing to do with their popularity now, they DID enjoy enormous popularity despite not being talented (in our opinions).

And as for; 'do I think they were all just in the right place at the right time', I believe that is a big part of it actually, so yes, along with other things I mentioned, image, talent, confidence etc...

Doing the style that is most popular at that particular time or jumping onto an emerging scene, even defining it is part of the recipe for success most definitely.

That's why an RnB artist will probably always do better now than some really old style such as punk or progressive rock because these aren't as popular in 2008, in general. Of course, there are a few exceptions to the rule.

And whether madonnas songs are good or not is a matter of opinion. I personally think a lot of her success is down to having the right image.

I also think a lot of older artists continue to be popular because they were around during a time when there were less bands and music was less available.

They are no more talented than a lot of new bands with similar sounds in my opinion, they are just regarded as 'classic' because they did it first.

Firstly, the Spice Girls. When they were around they created this whol 'girl power' thing that alot of people tapped into. That had nothing at all to do with their talent. Now those girls have grown up and moved on. The Spice Girls were not artists they were a phenomenon. It had nothing to do with their talent.

So do you think that 40 years of sustained records sales, critical acclaim and numerous awards is down to an artist being in the right place at the right time? Really? Surely talent had something to do with it?

I also dont understand the argument that older artists were popular because they had more of the market. Surely now they have less of the market and the modern day need for marketing and advertising their popularity would diminish?

In these modern time an artist can jump on a bandwagon to attain success but surely not 30 years of success. Surely that takes a bit of talent?

Exactly! And look how popular they were. So it isn’t always about talent at all.


Of course and I did say talent had something to do with it, twice now, along with the other things I mentioned, you just didn't listen.


Perhaps you don't understand but it makes perfect sense to me. They had more of the market then, and now are regarded as classic so it can be cool to like them again.


I think it does yes and I've said this.

The Spice Girls 'girl power' image was created by a man!! That's girl power for you:rolleyes: He tapped into what the market was missing at the time.

Well, technically, yes, Leona does have the better voice. What I am trying to say is this: Mick Jagger said in an interview that his voice is not what it once was, and was never brilliant anyway. But it didn's matter because it went with the music. But he said that if he had been an opera singer (for instance), he would not have been able to continue singing, because their voice does need to be pitch perfect, and opera singers need to be able to hit the right note each and every time.

Yes, I think Leona probably has got a better 'voice' than Mick Jagger in that sense, but I don't like her music. I wouldn't say her voice is only suited to bland drivel, because she hasn't actually released anything else.

I like Bob Dylan's songs very much. But I prefer to hear them sung by other people, because his voice is dreadful. I don't think anyone can honestly say that he has a technically good voice, even though some people might like it.

I don't think any of the Spice Girls are particularly talented at singing. Geri and Victoria in particular have a tremendous talent for self-promotion though. They were just in the right place at the right time. Their last single was the lowest selling Comic Relief song ever (or whatever charity it was they did it for). Their tour has had a lukewarm reception. Some of them have had moderate success in their solo careers, but none of them have had a long lasting solo career as a singer.

OK then.Lets break it down because I dont really understand exactly what you're saying.

Are you saying that Mariah Carey's 5 octave range is nothing special and even though that is something 99% of people do not have the ability to do it does not mean she's talented simply because you dont like her voice?

Yeah but Ruth the point I was trying to make was that people can have a good voice without technically being a good singer and some singers that are considered ‘technically’ good, I find to be plain awful such as Mariah.

It’s like, if a guy could hold a fridge up by his tongue, it’d be a talent but is it really a good one?! 99% of the population can't do it, wow, in that case I'm impressed then!

Mariah probably is talented in some perverted sense in that she succeeds in being able to sing like a freak. Leona is great at tapping into the youth market, off the back of the x-factor, singing bland songs in a crystal clear and arguably boring voice, but are we really supposed to be that impressed? Am I supposed to concede that she is amazingly talented despite believing talent in music relies on more than having a technically good voice?

I'm not disagreeing with you Matt, in one sense. I can't stand Mariah Carey's voice, but that's just my opinion. It doesn't mean that she doesn't have an amazing voice.

I mean, I love Pink Floyd. I work with a guy who hates them, but readily admits that they are incredibly talented. It's just not his type of music.

Ok, I just find it strange how someone can say they can't stand someones voice but then say she has an amazing voice :puzzled:

Amazing to someone else maybe but not me. To me she doesn't 'sing' the supposed 5 octaves, she whines them.

So I couldn't give a stuff how many octaves she can sing!, she will always sound like an ill tempered cat on helium to me :bigsmile:

Yes, but all I'm saying is that there is a difference between personal taste, and acknowledging someone's talent. I reckon if Mariah was to sing a different type of music (something a bit more rockier maybe), she might not sound so much like an ill tempered cat!!!

I was just saying that some people can think even the most hyped and supposedly talented artists are terrible. And the 5 octaves thing is nothing when I have to listen to the way she sings them. She butchers every one!

Mariah doing rock? I don’t even want to imagine that! :joker:

Somone acknowledging that Mariah or Leona are talented singers yet not liking their voice's is a show of the kind of objectivity I've been asking for in this line of music. I feel that something can be good despite the fact that it's not something I would usually like. Hence I acknowledge that Leona and Mariah are talented singers even though I personally dont like their music.

Good for you. I don't.

Dont what?

Acknowledge Mariah as a talented singer. I thought that would've been obvious.

Based on the fact that you personally don't like her tone?

:joker: I can base it on whatever I want! I'm not telling other poeple they can't like her.

It's not about liking her its about acknowledging her talent.