No dreading on my part. I could care less if the Voice jumps the shark. Nearly every long running show eventually does. Unless the star pulls the plug while they still are on top. Seinfeld and Home Improvement are a couple shows that ended at the right time.
I think hiring a entertainer known primarily for her shock value could be a mistake and a jump the shark moment. Time will tell. Miley is certainly capable of toning it down for tv. I said from the beginning that I think she’s a performance artist. Every shocking thing she’s done on stage or for the paparazzi tabloids is carefully planned to get her noticed and sell records. Wrecking Ball was a huge hit for her. Does that make her a great musician? imho No. Would I want my impressible 16 year old daughter coached and mentored by her? Probably not, it depends on the approach Miley takes next year on the show.
I have come into this thread to see what the beef would be about. Dude, I have bit my tongue (pun intended for the Mily reference!) because: a) I don’t watch the show; and b) I really don’t care. But you really are not thinking about this correctly.
Miley Cyrus is a fucking brilliant musician and manager of her own persona. The Voice is looking for people who will attract viewers while having some fact-based groundedness in the Mentors and their knowledge of Music and the Music Business. Sure, for her persona, she’s a pot-stirrer from the Madonna school, which means she attracts attention and is controversial. What’s not for NBC to love?
But, aceplace - c’mon, think about it. She grew up in the business. Her dad was a popstar. She had her own frikkin’ Disney show, and has been one of the few to successfully steer away from that into her own pop persona. She has a fine, big, technically good pop voice with a bit of grit to it.
You are welcome to hate her music and her persona, but not recognizing and respecting how successfully she has navigated her career is a limited view. Again, the show is a construct, but folks like Pharrell and Gwen Stefani know their shit both musically and around the music business. So does Miley.
Yeah, I would say Keys and Aguilera are at the same tier, it being personal taste which you like better. I personally prefer some of the growl and rawness in Aguilera’s vocals. I find it a little much to dismiss her as “just another pop singer.” She has an interesting voice, a wide vocal range, and maybe not the most classical technique, but it works for me. Back in the Aguilera, Brittney, and Lopez days (early 2000s), she seemed to me to be clearly a league ahead of her peers.
I agree Miley knows the music business and certainly understands self promotion. She certainly shattered any lingering Hannah Montana typecasting. Like a Wrecking Ball
I didn’t mean to come off too harsh or judgemental. Miley is a performance artist. Just like Madonna, Gaga and many others. They put most of their focus on their public image and theatrical staging of their concerts. KISS really started that trend 45 years ago. Madonna took it even farther in the 80’s. Modern performance artists like Gaga have taken it to an extreme level using social media. They sell records and have hits. But their focus is primarily on being outrageous and theatrical . They make big $$$$$ doing it.
I prefer more of a balance. Where music is the focus. They can still have a great stage act too. Joan Jett for example. A really fun rocking, bad ass stage show. But I think its the music that she cares about most. I went to a couple Hank Williams jr concerts in the 90’s. A rowdy country-rocking good time. He plays at least five different instruments through out his shows. Hank won performer of year several times. You can focus on music and still put on a great stage act.
I guess its apples and oranges. Whatever someone prefers. I erred by being too harsh on Miley. It was not personal. I dislike her public and stage persona but have always known it was a business decision. Breaking that Hannah Montana stereotype from her younger career.
I feel like some folks used to say this about David Bowie as well (heck, there was a reason the Grammy’s picked Gaga to do the Bowie memorial act). If the music is good, then the public persona, regardless of outrageous or theatrical, doesn’t particularly matter.
Screw it–I like a bit of theatre in my music. I mean, most of the music I listen to is straight-ahead no-nonsense, go-up-there-and-play stuff, but after seeing about a million jeans & tee-shirts alternative/indie rock bands back in the 90s, I began to appreciate bringing back some of the braggadocio and theatre into musical performances.
But wouldn’t you agree the experience of attending a Gaga concert would be polar opposite from attending an Aretha Franklin concert?
They are both entertainers and obviously sing different styles of music. But their stage act is designed totally differently too, It’s intended to serve a different purpose and reflects what the entertainer feels is important.
Both are successful artists but I’d prefer attending Aretha’s show.
I’m not slamming performance artists. They can be entertaining if you like their shtick. KISS had their pyrotechnics. Bowie was very moody and theatrical. Almost operatic.
I don’t know about “polar opposites.” They’re both wonderful musicians, in my estimation. Gaga’s show would be more theatrical, I think (though I wouldn’t be surprised if she went through a non-theatrical phase), but I think she’s got chops. Of course, I’d love to see a legend like Aretha, too. But Gaga’s more than a solid singer, theatrics aside. You can read the vocal nerds rating of her here, where they list her as an “A-list” singer, but not a “star singer.” She’s not to be underestimated. I personally think she’s great.
I am the curmudeonest of the curmudgeons. And i don’t include GaGa in my rails against the likes of Jesse J and Nicki Minaj. GaGa is allright in my book.
I wouldn’t say Gaga is the best – Beyonce might be my vote, but her tone is a little less distinctive. I never found Madonna particular outstanding as a vocalist, but she has good range–gets a bit thin in the upper register, though. And a wonderful entertainer–I like her music a lot, but she’s not what I think of when I think of the upper echelon of singers purely as singers.
There ya go. There’s a big difference between “I hate what she does, but I can see why she would be viewed as an experience, knowledgable Mentor on a show like this.”
As for your preferences, hey, whatever works. All musicians have a persona - and with many, really, that’s all they have. Miley Cyrus isn’t like that, even if her persona is distracting. Part of the game.
Personally I get annoyed by will.i.am as a judge on the UK version of The Voice - he’s at best a mediocre coach and can’t really sing, yet the other three more talented judges have all been changed - sometimes more than once - and he remains*.
And he remains because he’s a babbling weirdo who makes entertaining television. And, above all, these shows are television shows, not an actual audition process for a rising star (as evidenced by the fact that you never hear from any of the winners ever). Television shows are about telelvison ratings. Miley Cyrus will get people watching. As long as she doesn’t drive people away, it’s all money in the bank for the show.
*although apparently he’s leaving when the show moves to ITV next series, as is Ricky Wilson.
I became a big fan of Miley Cyrus when I heard her cover Paul Simon’s “50 ways to leave your lover” on the SNL 40th anniversary show.
I then stumbled into a bunch of her videos on Youtube where she covers slightly older classics in a stripped down setting called “Backyard Sessions”. No theatrics at all. Just a bunch of musicians actually playing music in a backyard.
No dreading on my part. I could care less if the Voice jumps the shark. Nearly every long running show eventually does. Unless the star pulls the plug while they still are on top. Seinfeld and Home Improvement are a couple shows that ended at the right time.