4 ms·

What's wrong with being a rock star? Article wreaks a bit from being haughty.

by jksmith 10y ago

ktRolster 10y ago
There's nothing wrong with it, but often they are famous because of their personality, and have little actual skill, including needing auto-tune or even lip-syncing performances. The skill needed to be a rock-star is orthogonal to the skill needed to make beautiful music, and that is why those skills are worth considering separately.
- girvo 10y ago
  > but often they are famous because of their personality, and have little actual skill, including needing auto-tune or even lip-syncing performances. So, we're being haughty then. Because that's... painting in broad strokes, to say the least.
  - ktRolster 10y ago
    >So, we're being haughty then Well good, you've reached the second level on the hierarchy of disagreement: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Graham%27s_Hierarchy_of_Disagreement.svg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Graham%27s_Hierarchy... Do you have something more substantial to say, or is that it?
- rimantas 10y ago
  For some reason I associate autotune and lip-sync with pop music but not rock.
  - ktRolster 10y ago
    If you like rock and want to feel depressed, check out the current billboard top 10 in the rock category. The golden age of rock was definitely before the advent of auto-tune. (Though even the Beatles could have benefited from being more in tune). http://www.billboard.com/charts/rock-songs http://www.billboard.com/charts/rock-songs
yomly 10y ago
There's absolutely nothing wrong with being a rockstar, some people enjoy fame, others don't. Chopin and Schubert were comparatively reticent as composers, for example. The connotation within the space is that the rockstar is not a serious figure. In Liszt's case, was he more about wowing stages with his own technical virtuosity than crafting tasteful music? This is a characterisation attached to him and it implies selfish motivations for his composing (which is fine, regardless, people are free to lead whatever life they choose). I'm saying that even if Liszt did lead a rockstar life, he should still be taken seriously. Mozart does not get the same degree of scrutiny but also led a fairly rockstar lifestyle...

What's wrong with being a rock star? Article wreaks a bit from being haughty.

by jksmith 10y ago

What's wrong with being a rock star? Article wreaks a bit from being haughty.

There's nothing wrong with it, but often they are famous because of their personality, and have little actual skill, including needing auto-tune or even lip-syncing performances. The skill needed to be a rock-star is orthogonal to the skill needed to make beautiful music, and that is why those skills are worth considering separately.

girvo 10y ago
> but often they are famous because of their personality, and have little actual skill, including needing auto-tune or even lip-syncing performances. So, we're being haughty then. Because that's... painting in broad strokes, to say the least.
- ktRolster 10y ago
  >So, we're being haughty then Well good, you've reached the second level on the hierarchy of disagreement: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Graham%27s_Hierarchy_of_Disagreement.svg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Graham%27s_Hierarchy... Do you have something more substantial to say, or is that it?
rimantas 10y ago
For some reason I associate autotune and lip-sync with pop music but not rock.
- ktRolster 10y ago
  If you like rock and want to feel depressed, check out the current billboard top 10 in the rock category. The golden age of rock was definitely before the advent of auto-tune. (Though even the Beatles could have benefited from being more in tune). http://www.billboard.com/charts/rock-songs http://www.billboard.com/charts/rock-songs

yomly 10y ago

There's absolutely nothing wrong with being a rockstar, some people enjoy fame, others don't. Chopin and Schubert were comparatively reticent as composers, for example. The connotation within the space is that the rockstar is not a serious figure. In Liszt's case, was he more about wowing stages with his own technical virtuosity than crafting tasteful music? This is a characterisation attached to him and it implies selfish motivations for his composing (which is fine, regardless, people are free to lead whatever life they choose). I'm saying that even if Liszt did lead a rockstar life, he should still be taken seriously. Mozart does not get the same degree of scrutiny but also led a fairly rockstar lifestyle...