4 ms·

From the article: "There were other consequences from the adoption of Auto-Tune. Hildebrand tells the story of a music producer who jokes that once he used to l

From the article: "There were other consequences from the adoption of Auto-Tune. Hildebrand tells the story of a music producer who jokes that once he used to look for good singers, now . . . it’s pretty faces." This is the reason that a lot of recent popular commercial music is crap to my ears. A lot of the real talent is hidden by "cosmetic imperfections" and isn't suited for the mass marketing machine that desires pretty faces. If you go back before the modern era of digital manipulation, you'll be amazed at the vocal talent that is represented.

InclinedPlane 15y ago
There's still plenty of legitimate vocal talent out there, but if you spend your time with your ears turned towards the noise machine of the big music distributors you might miss it. The world is changing. Technology is making it easier for talented artists to make a living outside the traditional confines of the industry, even producing and distributing music themselves. The industry has fallen back to relying on the sorts of "media phenomenon" type artists (face, lifestyle, music, in that order) who get the greatest boost from what the industry can provide and are thus the most dependent on that industry. Someone with solid pipes and solid musical skills will find it easier to DIY their tours, albums, etc. and make a decent living while in complete control of their music. Someone who's just a face and an approximation of a singing voice who requires autotune, requires others to write their songs, requires a backup band, etc. that person is going to be welded to their producers like nobody's business. And their producers are going to use every tool at their disposal to ride them for everything their worth (publicity blitz, etc.) It doesn't help that modern broadcast radio is feckless and moribund.
pasbesoin 15y ago
It is amazing, these days, the extent to which a second or two glance allows me to categorize particularly a female talent within the "Hollywood ecosphere", for lack of a better term. Such guestimates are not 100% accurate, but once one gets away from the established A-list (particularly the older set, established before some of the latest "prettification"), they are pretty close. This has been talked and written about time and again, but I also see appearance playing such a role in many work environments. I wonder to what extent the former may be reinforcing the latter. I see similar selection bias in the popular music industry. Again, top talent may escape it (but have plenty of professionals around for makeup and whatnot), but below that level, looks are king or queen.

InclinedPlane 15y ago

There's still plenty of legitimate vocal talent out there, but if you spend your time with your ears turned towards the noise machine of the big music distributors you might miss it. The world is changing. Technology is making it easier for talented artists to make a living outside the traditional confines of the industry, even producing and distributing music themselves. The industry has fallen back to relying on the sorts of "media phenomenon" type artists (face, lifestyle, music, in that order) who get the greatest boost from what the industry can provide and are thus the most dependent on that industry. Someone with solid pipes and solid musical skills will find it easier to DIY their tours, albums, etc. and make a decent living while in complete control of their music. Someone who's just a face and an approximation of a singing voice who requires autotune, requires others to write their songs, requires a backup band, etc. that person is going to be welded to their producers like nobody's business. And their producers are going to use every tool at their disposal to ride them for everything their worth (publicity blitz, etc.) It doesn't help that modern broadcast radio is feckless and moribund.

pasbesoin 15y ago

It is amazing, these days, the extent to which a second or two glance allows me to categorize particularly a female talent within the "Hollywood ecosphere", for lack of a better term. Such guestimates are not 100% accurate, but once one gets away from the established A-list (particularly the older set, established before some of the latest "prettification"), they are pretty close. This has been talked and written about time and again, but I also see appearance playing such a role in many work environments. I wonder to what extent the former may be reinforcing the latter. I see similar selection bias in the popular music industry. Again, top talent may escape it (but have plenty of professionals around for makeup and whatnot), but below that level, looks are king or queen.