why do some people criticise singers who dont write their own songs
 

Frank Sinatra and Bing Crosby, two musical greats, didn't write their songs
Elvis didn't either
Pavarotti didn't write Nessun Dorma
the great singers from previous centuries didn't write songs either

what is wrong with that? Singing and writing are two different unrelated talents. Why should one person be great at both. Is it not better to get the best writer and the best singer to make the best song.
You wouldn't expect film scriptwriters to be the actors would you.

Most artists these days that don't write their own songs can't even sing either. They're just cheating really.

Because the people who complain about people who dont write their own songs, listen to people who do, and then look down on those who dont generally :)

*waits to be burned*

Sinatra and Elvis and co were many, many years ago my friend.

The reason why people despise people who don't write their own songs is not because it's an unrelated talent it's because it's unartistic. If you want to not take pop like that seriously then fair enough but it's not proper art because theres no expression taking place. They are singing somebody elses emotions.

I think it's because not as much of them has gone into an album and other people have wrote the songs and don't really get much credit for it and not as much of the money.

because some people are compelled to believe good music is born through all of that stuff. of course, it's only acceptable if the artist releases a particular style.

for example, mariah carey has, for 20 years now, written and produced every song and lyric she's ever sung - yet she gets as much praise for that from people as miley cyrus probably would. she's also one of the greatest vocal talents in recent history....but people don't care because she isn't releasing an acceptable style.

Songwriters get a lot of money! Artists who write their own songs get so much money cos they've done everything.

I'll leave the people who know how to word it better argue about this,lol! But I argee with whatever they say.

Well i didn't know that princess lol.

And now you do :p

But the thing about those greats is that they put their own individual stamp on any song they decided to cover. I don't think there's many acts today who are manufactured that have that kind of quality or class in their voices. That's the difference. Today's plastic is just disposable nonsense. Anytime they do decide to cover classics they're absolute disasters.

;)

Producers get payed far more than artists generally.

Thats why i hate timberland.. hes a producer why does he have to have his own songs ..

Like timberland featuring one republic when they sing the song and he just says yeah yeah yeah he gets payed more, and more recognision to.

I 100% agree. The person who wrote the song, clearly doesn't mind someone else singing it and if it's a good song, who cares.

It's because people listen to artists who do, and think they are the only ones with real talent.

you sure about that?

Yeah I hate that. It's like he needs to leave his own mark on a track like a dog marking it's territory.

I don't Criticise Artrts that don't write their own songs. But tbf i respect them more, if they do. ATM most singers that don't write are R'n'B or Rap ****, so yeah i Criticise them, but not because they don't write songs LOL.

Thank you finally someone other than me notices this guy is a tool.

He gets payed more than the singer in question for producing it..
But he needs more money and to be in the song, and to be noticed more..

Some people need their song written for them, cos they're terrible at it. Mostly the ones who smile alot, are good looking and like to lip sync.

songs aren't always about lyrics or emotions. To be honest it's quite hard a lot of the times to know what the lyrics are or even to care. The best songs in my view are the ones which have great melodies and which sound musically attractive. And on that note it doesn't really matter if the person singing it created the melodies.
And even the songs that are more based around the lyrics they aren't necessarily always the genuine emotions of the writer anyway. Songs are often made for other people to relate to. The writer may be writing about an experience which he never had but other people have had it so he is writing it for them. Writing music like writing films or books are more often about creating something that other people relate to rather than always expressing your own emotions.

lol:p

Hmm.. I respect an artist a lot more if they write their own songs, but I wouldn't condemn someone who didn't. I do think all artists should have SOME input into their songs, even if it's just a few co-written per album or so.

To be fair though, if I had to choose between a song I'd written myself, or a BETTER song on the same subject that had been written for me, I'd choose the latter. Chances are I'd prefer it, and if I think it's better, then why would I turn it down if it's something I can still relate to?

Tbh I don't care either way.

A writer of a song wouldn't give their song away if they didn't want it to be. So really if the writer of the song isn't bothered, why the hell should anyone else be...?

Then you and I clearly approach music very, very differently.

Like I said, I have no problem with artists not writting songs, just treat it as it is. A novelty. Some good tunes. Fun. That sort of thing. But please don't tell me it's a credible art form because it's not.

Why are you comparing books and films to music to try and back up your point? Three totally different things. Actors are needed to play parts in films. Unfortunately the script writter can't play seventy different people all at once to convey the emotion penned in the script.