Is American Idol The Only Way To Make It In The Music Industry Today?

I am putting this in Humble Opinion as I don’t want this to turn into a “who will win American Idol this year?” discussion.

I am wondering if American Idol has turned into the only way a young(er) person can realistically break into the music industry today? No matter what you think of the show, you have to admit that by the time the winner of the season has been announced, at least 12 people are now recognizable to the general public and have a legitimate shot at getting a record deal and selling some CDs, winning a Grammy, making a few bucks on tour or getting a lead role on Broadway - all of which has happened for past contestants.

The music industry is a brutal business. No matter how talented you are, the odds are against you. There are far more talented singers out there, some even with several CD’s on the market, who will never get the exposure of those 12 final contestants on that show, appearing on television for week after week in front of millions of viewers. Granted, most of those final contestants will be lucky to find work on a cruise ship in a few years, but nobody can say they didn’t have the best opportunity in the world to make it - especially if they have the talent.

So the question is, hypothetically speaking, if you knew a young person who wanted to make it as a singer, would you encourage them to go on American Idol for their shot at fame and fortune - or would you tell them it is nothing more than a game show and they should go the traditional route and try to make it on their own?

I would tell them that if they wanted to be a singer, they should sing.

Trying to hit “the big time” is a total waste of time and energy, IMHO. Get the training and put your talent out there, and if “big” things happen - great. But if only “small” things happen, that’s fine too.

Enjoy the process, and don’t waste time wishing you could be more than you are.

I find this an odd question, simply because the assertion made is patently not true, but also because in some ways, American Idol is one of the worst ways to makea career as a popular musician.

The main reason for that is that the American Idol concept looms so large that it is extraordinarily difficult to establish an identity beyond its bounds. The only contestant to have done so to any extent is Kelly Clarkson. Clay Aiken, Carrie Underwood, Ruben Studdard etc. are all so inextricably linked to the program which gave them their fame that they are finding it near impossible to establish an identity (i.e. brand) outside the confines of “Reality TV star.” Their medium may be music, but in terms of the way they are seen in public, they are perceived in a manner more similar to Colby Donaldson than Beyonce Knowles. It’s little surprise that the one artist who has established a musical identity beyond American Idol, Kelly Clarkson is the one most likely to have any sort of lasting career success.

It’s not the fault of the artists who are on AI that they’re are almost certainly destined for 15 minute flash-in-the-pan careers. That is how Idol works. The show is the star, not the artists it produces. Even the best possible scenario for an artist is fraught with difficulties; Clarkson’s future is still hardly assured and she only managed to get to the position she is in now by releasing a second album superior in every way to her first and having a number of very well written singles driving it.

I can think of a number of routes an aspiring artist should direct their energies toward, and although each is fraught with its own difficulties and requires a lot of luck, remember, getting to any sort of significant stage on Idol is hardly a cakewalk.

1. Become A Producer - People like Kanye West, Pharrell Williams, Lil’ Jon and Dr. Dre produced other people’s records long before they became significant stars. Missy Elliott, too, did a lot of production while she was establishing herself as an artist. This probably works because doing the behind-the-scenes work behind the boards is a good way to establish yourself in the industry - the public may not recognize you yet, but all the big record company guys know who you are - and it ensures you know the way a song works - and even if you’re just singing someone else’s track, you’re still going to do that better if you understand how music works. And the payoff can be ridiculous. Kanye West released his debut album in 2004. By mid 2005, he was on the cover of Time magazine. It took U2 about 6 years, I believe, to reach that milestone.

2. Learn How To Rap - Rappers outweight American Idol artists on the charts by a huge amount. Sure, there’s a lot of people out there, and it’s tough to get attention, but the same is true of Idol. And you could be setting yourself up for a much longer career.

3. Start A Band - Don’t underestimate the garage band route. The Killers, Modest Mouse, Green Day, Maroon 5, etc. have all found susbtantial success the same way other bands have for decades - writing songs, playing them and building an audience. The Arctic Monkeys released the UK’s fastest ever selling album by doing just that (This point comes with a subclause - 3.1. Get a MySpace page). It should also be pointed out that Gwen Stefani is one of the biggest pop stars in the country, and her fame is due to about 15-20 years as the frontwoman of No Doubt.

4. Hook Up With Disney - This could be one of the most promising ideas on this list. (The only qualification is that the younger you are, the better your chances are.) Idol has nothing on Disney; Disney for a start has produced bona fide stars with lasting careers. Britney Spears is still an A-list celebrity; she released her first single in 1998, but got her start as a Mousketeer. Other Mousketeers that found significant success include JC Chasez (of *NSync), Justin Timberlake (first of *NSync and then as a solo artist) and Christina Aguilera. Hilary Duff began on the Disney Channel’s Lizzy McGuire Show, she’s released two albums as a pop star, and while these were successful, her challenge now is to work out how to grow out of her tween audience. She’s made some tentative steps toward adulthood with some singles written by the guy from Good Charlotte, but whether she succeeds or not, her long term career prospects are already better than most Idol contestants. Lindsey Lohan has released two somewhat shaky albums so far, but again, I would say she has a better chance at success than most Idol contestants.

The other advantage with Disney is that, unlike Idol, the institution doesn’t overshadow the star. All the Disney artists have brands beyond being Disney artists. In fact, their Disney connection is hardly remarked upon.

There you go - in answer to your question, if a young person was looking for fame as a singer, there are many routes which could bring them success, but they might have a better opportunity with the Mouse than the Fox.

It’s a curious OP, just looking at the Billboard charts. The great majority of chart-topping artists are

  1. Young, or at least not old, and

  2. Weren’t on “American Idol.”

I mean, you only have to listen to the radio for ten minutes to hear successful young artists who aren’t on American Idol.

To expand on what Guy Incognito said, once gets the sense that part of the reason American Idol contestants are generally not headed for stardom is that they are, for the most part, people who are NOT serious about music careers. A shocking number of the contestants who claim to have dreamed of a career in music did essentially nothing to have such a career. There are some exceptions - Kelly Clarkson tried to sell a demo CD, Ruben Studdard was a voice major, and current contestant Taylor Hicks is already a professional musician - but for the most part they’re just folks who think they can sing who showed to the auditions on a lark. That ISN’T a surefire recipe for success.

Or look at it this way; how many people have auditioned for American Idol? It’s got to be a quarter of a million, if you believe their claims, over five seasons. How many people have made decent money as a result? Ten? Maybe ten, and some of those (e.g. Clay Aiken) had better have saved a lot of it, because they didn’t last long. One out of 25,000 is actually bad odds; if you work hard at the normal route, and keep at it, you have better than 1 in 25,000 odds of at least making a decent living in the music industry.

The “only way”?

Look, so far, four people have been champions on “American Idol.” Two of them have had almost no commercial success as recording artists since.

Is the OP suggesting that only two new acts have become successful in the music biz in the past four years???

No, I did not read the question that way at all. I think DMark was just wondering, based on his perception.

From a number of years (peripherally) in the music business, I know that a lot of it is pure luck, that a lot of really good song/groups (IMHO) never got the promotion or play that was needed to get them into the Top 40.\

Kinda like acting, or race car driving: A LOT of things have to come together to make a star. A lot of great candidates are left behind through no fault of their own.

And, a lot of crappy, no-talent folk also get to be stars(usually briefly) in whatever genre, again thru no fault of their own. :slight_smile:

Well, I’ve never liked the show to begin with. I saw two episodes in season one, two episodes in season 3, and none in seasons two and four.

I tuned in earlier this season ONLY because they were recruiting here i nAustin, and I was curious how Austin’s music scene would represent.

Turns out, it DIDN’T, for a reason I should have foreseen. Austin has many, many superb bands and singers, but NONE of the truly talented ones had any interest in appearing on “American Idol.” Talented people come to Austin hoping to form bands that will write and perform interesting, original music. Those are NOT people who are likely to spend weeks singing Celine Dion and Barry Manilow covers, in hopes of getting to sing generic pop for Simon Cowell’s label.

So, none of the superb vocalists who COULD have blown away the judges showed up for tryouts. But thousands of morons who think they sound good in the shower or at the local karaoke bar did show up.

Small wonder Randy Jackson could be seen shaking his head, saying “I heard Austin had a great music scene, but this is the most embarrassing bunch yet.” But Randy simply fails to grasp that the people who’ve GIVEN Austin a great reputation for music would be embrarrassed to be seen on his show.

Perhaps my OP wasn’t clear.

Of course American Idol is not the only way to achieve success in the music industry. But it is a pretty straight shot…you audition, if you make that, you go on and everything else is pretty much taken care of.

Going on your own means probably moving by yourself to a larger city (NY, LA or Nashville), finding a day job, trying to get gigs, trying to meet the right people, trying to get a demo, trying to get airplay, trying, trying, trying. I personally know of dozens of people in NY and LA who have spent years trying to get that break. The competition is fierce. I don’t doubt for a minute that thousands of great talents simply gave up, moved home and went into the family business after they beat their heads against the wall to no success.

Yes, American Idol supposedly has a pretty iron-clad contract, and you are crammed into a mold of sorts, and your career through them could vanish before the seasons change. But how many of those contestants would have ever made it that far on their own? Some have never been out of their county, let alone venture off to a music capital.

I was just wondering if this Fox formula for success is indeed a viable option, and alternative, for a talented singer who might otherwise never be heard other than at a local ice cream social.

I don’t think AI is having that much impact on the real music business. It’s just a silly TV show. Sure it’s very popular, but really, how many CDs of a capella schlock do you own? That’s one thing I think is so sorely lacking on AI. Let people play their own music! The whole “just focus on the singer, the musicians are just paid hacks” thing, while it has made quite a resurgence with the pop tarts and boy bands, simply isn’t enough for most music listeners, who are used to artists who write, sing and play their own original material, or at least make original sounds via sampling, beats and rapping. AI isn’t any better than a karaoke bar: it’s fun, but what, you’re going to buy a CD of that?

Aretha Franklin didn’t write her own music. Neither did the Supremes. On the contrary, what’s relatively new is the notion that singers MUST write their own songs to be “Real musicians” in the eyes of music fans. Truth be told, it makes not a lick of difference to the quality of the music if the singer wrote the song or not.

It’s certainly true that AI has allowed numerous singers to have more success, or at least exposure, than they otherwise would have. Take William Hung, for example. Seriously, if he wasn’t on AI, do you think anyone on the planet would give a rat’s butt how lousy a singer he is?* And I can say with total confidence that Jasmine Trias would’ve had a much harder time had that mean 'ol Simon Cowell not torn her down week after week.

Real success is much more elusive. As Guy Incognito mentioned, breaking out of the mold is hard (I swear, at least half the freaking reviews of Reuben Studdard and Fantasia Barrino’s albums on amazon.com mention the show), and it’s not easy to build a fanbase if you weren’t charismatic or likable to begin with. Winning guarantees a record deal. Nothing more. And even if a contestant finishes 2nd or 3rd and isn’t locked into a deal (which is why that’s supposedly better than winning), that doesn’t eliminate the need for a strong album and publicity.

The best case would be someone who has the ability to be a great singer but just doesn’t have the connections, is too busy with a regular job, is in a place with too much competition, something like that. (Someone, I don’t remember who, speculated that that’s exactly why Chris Daughtry entered.) As Kelly Clarkson showed, AI can be a springboard to success. But only for someone who was capable of it to begin with.

  • I’ve listen to some samples from his CD, and IMO, he just doesn’t have the right voice to be a professional singer. Bet he’s a blast at parties, though.

If I ever become God Emperor Of The Universe, one of the very first things I will do is to permanently and irrevocably ban, purge, and expunge anything that even hints of being Reality TV and/or a (Wherever) Idol knock-off.

Having said that, my other half likes the show, but it seems that the WORST thing you can do for your Music Career (in Australia, anyway) is to actually win Australian Idol.

The first winner promptly buggered off to Indonesia to do a bunch of feel good Christian crap and hasn’t really been seen since, the second winner was an overweight 16 year old girl who smokes and wouldn’t do interviews or any publicity stuff, and I’ve got no idea who won the third one (Wikipedia says it was a girl by the name of Kate DeAraugo, now that I look. Never heard of her, don’t care.)

None of them have done anything of note beyond the song released after they won, and it’s been the Runners Up who tend to get the mileage out of it.

The thing is, from what I’ve seen, most of the contestants on Australian Idol are no better than most Cover Bands in the local pub, and as someone said earlier, the talented people aren’t auditioning because they’re better than singing bland teeny bopper pop/crap on Simon Cowell’s record label. Sure, they might not get a record contract out of it, but they’re never going to be short of work in the local area, and for many that’s all they want- and they can move into other areas of the Music Industry with their experience, all without compromising themselves, if that’s what they want.

Personally, I’d rather hear a good Pub Band performing a gig over 98% of the audiophonic blasphemy that is most pop music these days, but I’m not really a Music Person at the best of times- which drives a lot of people my age to distraction when they can’t believe or understand I really don’t give a shit about the Obscure Band Du Jour or whatever The White Stripes are doing for their next studio album, so you’ll have to take my thoughts on this kind of thing at face value, I’m afraid… :slight_smile:

Good point, and I agree. But I think you’ve got to either be an Aretha Franklin, a unique talent, or a sex symbol with corporate backing to be able to do it that way. It also depends on the genre; I was thinking more of rock, but many, if not most country, r&b, and light pop acts use hacks as well.

I’d agree that there isn’t an excess of quality either way, though to me there is often a ‘qualitative’ difference (as in not a quantitative one…) between the work of a singer-songwriter and music that was authored by different people than the ones performing it. And having a good variety of both makes any particular musical scene richer I think.

I would certainly disagree with any sentiment of “just focus on the singer”… for most popular music vocalism, instrumentation, authorship, and production are ingredients to the mix with nearly equal importance to the final product. In certain cases one of them can be left out deliberately and still create good music… (IE, instrumental-only songs like some of the ones that Leahy and the Corrs do, a capella singing without accompaniment, or modern versions of old traditional folk songs that were never ‘authored’ by any particular people,) but you can’t afford to do any of them in a half-assed way.

:slight_smile:

I’ll agree and add that vocal quality is fading into the background as a requirement for making popular music. Yes, some of todays singers are driven by their vocal talents (Mariah Carey, Aguilera, Beyonce, Etc.) but for every talented singer there are 5 more that would have been booted out of AI auditions that are currently putting out chart topping hits (Britney Spears, Ashley Simpson, Fiddy Sent, lead singers of Good Charolette, Sum 41, Blink 182).
Popular music seems to be more song, lyric, hook, production driven.

OK, so that’s a 50% success rate. Beats any other road to stardom out there by a long shot. :smiley: Of course the once-a-year trickle of AI winners kind of makes that irrelevant.

It’s certainly a viable alternative. If nothing else it’s a way of measuring yourself against others and getting some exposure and audition experience.

I certainly wouldn’t encourage them to go on AI for their “Big Shot” at fame. That’s just bound to end in embarassment and tears.

What I would encourage them to do, if they were so inclined, is audition for AI, but treat it like any other audition (they certainly should have audition experience before AI). If they make it, great. If they don’t, it’s not the end of the world. Take your lumps and move on to the next thing. So I’d go along with:

They’re on their own no matter what, actually. Any success they achieve “on their own” will be a combination of their hard work and being introduced to people who will grease the skids, so to speak.

I’ve seen maybe one and a half episodes of American Idol usually towards the end and despite the cheesiness of it all, the people who made it that far were pretty damn good. I really doubt anyone at that level went from singing at the ice cream social to an AI audition to the quarter finals, or whatever they call it. Despite their youth, they seemed to be seasoned entertainers.

A little disingenuous to compare that 50% rate against any other ‘road to stardom’… figure out what the number of people who have started on the american idol road, (by showing up for an audition,) and compare to those 2 to get a total ‘road to stardom’ success rate.

(Then again, I suspect you might have realized that which is why you were laughing at yerself.)

What might be appropriate to say is that winning american idol seems to be a significant progressive step to pop stardom… 50% of the people who have got to that point have gone on further. But then, it’s still a small sample size at this point, and we don’t know what the careers of any of those 4 winners are going to look like 25 years from now.

Yes, that’s what I meant.

I don’t think not having to have vocal talent to make records is something new. I think it’s always been the case that some are driven by vocal talents, while others get record deals for what seem to us to be unknown reasons. Listen to an “oldies” station and you’ll see what I mean. I’ll use the song “Louie Louie” as an example. Sure, many people consider it a classic, but if you listen a little closer, it’s quite easy to hear that those people had no musical talent whatsoever. Right now the song “Wild Thing” is playing in the background and I’m thinking the same thing. I think criticizing the music of today has long been one of those things that comes along with getting older. You know, “Kids these days don’t know good music. Why, when I was a kid, we had good music, and people really knew how to sing. Not only that, but we walked to the record store uphill both ways to buy their music on these magical things called records.”

Okay, I’m done hijacking the tread now. Carry on.

Add me to the list of people who see a different universe from the OP.

Case in point: Diana DeGarmo. 2nd place in 2004. Record contract cancelled in 2005. Still unsigned.

Definitely seems to be the best way to kill a career.

Some other notes:

  1. Britney Spears appeared on “Star Search”. It was considered a key step in getting her on the New Mickey Mouse Club (which had previously rejected her). So she actually has a career because of an AI-type show.

  2. People are citing as good singers some performers who are extremely well known as awful singers that rely heavily on studio editing to get passable sound out of them. Sheesh. You’re not hearing a voice, you’re hearing a machine. People with great singing voices are not wanted by music companies.