|
Post by Socal Fan on Apr 12, 2020 15:24:04 GMT -5
I think Grimm won because I'd bet that more kids vote than adults and most kids had no interest in what Jackie sang. Kids, especially girls, like cute guys with guitars, and while he might not have been spectacular, he was good and a lot more appealing to them than Jackie was. Kids like cute young guys with guitars (e.g., Shawn Mendes). Michael Grimm was already in his 30s. I agree that kids would not be interested in what Jackie sang, but they would not be interested in what Michael Grimm sang either as his music was geared towards boomer tastes. Besides the vote was not between Jackie and Grimm but between four candidates of which Jackie and Grimm were two.
People often think of the vote as between the top two candidates but in reality it is between a group of candidates and the winner rarely has a majority but only a plurality of the votes cast. Recently it has been a vote between the Top 10 candidates. Back in 2010, the show was on twice a week and the vote was between the top four candidates. The final four were Jackie, Grimm, Poppycock, and some dance troupe called Fighting Gravity. Jackie and Poppycock had been the favorites from the beginning and polls had them close going into the finals.
For his finals act, Poppycock was giving a not very good performance (partly due to poor song choice, partly to technical malfunctions) but certainly not worthy of being buzzed. When Morgan buzzed him, Poppycock fans on the internet were enraged and claimed he did it to help Jackie. Fighting Gravity had messed up a few times also and really had no chance of winning either. Poppycock lost a lot of support and the overwhelming majority must have gone to Grimm given the reaction and how the latter pulled off such a huge upset. If Morgan had not buzzed Poppycock but merely criticized him in the comments (as the other judges did), Poppycock would not have fallen apart at the end but still would have lost a lot of votes because of an overall poor performance. I think Poppycock would have lost votes anyway but fewer of them and those he lost would have been more evenly split rather than highly favoring Grimm. If I recall correctly, there was some sort of technical glitch with the vote tabulations. That might have screwed up the vote in Grimm's favor.
|
|
|
Post by Socal Fan on Apr 12, 2020 15:31:16 GMT -5
Grimm also had a good sob story. The grandparents who lost their home in a hurricane and he could help them if he won. Jackie had the bankrupt unemployed parents. But that was revealed mostly only in the tabloids and internet discussions. Her background told during the broadcasts made her appear to be in a relatively privileged upbringing of a nice big family living in the suburbs. I'm not sure though if playing up the financially burdened parents angle would have helped or if it would have drawn resentment from the idea of a young child's talent used for bailing out her parents. If you lose your home in a hurricane, the public is sympathetic with you as a victim. But if you go bankrupt, the public blames you for mismanaging for finances, whether you deserve it or not. That's why Jackie never mentioned the bankruptcy - it would not have been in her favor.
|
|
|
Post by 1 Guest on Apr 12, 2020 15:48:45 GMT -5
Kids like cute young guys with guitars (e.g., Shawn Mendes). Michael Grimm was already in his 30s. I agree that kids would not be interested in what Jackie sang, but they would not be interested in what Michael Grimm sang either as his music was geared towards boomer tastes. Besides the vote was not between Jackie and Grimm but between four candidates of which Jackie and Grimm were two.
People often think of the vote as between the top two candidates but in reality it is between a group of candidates and the winner rarely has a majority but only a plurality of the votes cast. Recently it has been a vote between the Top 10 candidates. Back in 2010, the show was on twice a week and the vote was between the top four candidates. The final four were Jackie, Grimm, Poppycock, and some dance troupe called Fighting Gravity. Jackie and Poppycock had been the favorites from the beginning and polls had them close going into the finals.
For his finals act, Poppycock was giving a not very good performance (partly due to poor song choice, partly to technical malfunctions) but certainly not worthy of being buzzed. When Morgan buzzed him, Poppycock fans on the internet were enraged and claimed he did it to help Jackie. Fighting Gravity had messed up a few times also and really had no chance of winning either. Poppycock lost a lot of support and the overwhelming majority must have gone to Grimm given the reaction and how the latter pulled off such a huge upset. If Morgan had not buzzed Poppycock but merely criticized him in the comments (as the other judges did), Poppycock would not have fallen apart at the end but still would have lost a lot of votes because of an overall poor performance. I think Poppycock would have lost votes anyway but fewer of them and those he lost would have been more evenly split rather than highly favoring Grimm. If I recall correctly, there was some sort of technical glitch with the vote tabulations. That might have screwed up the vote in Grimm's favor. Really? Where did you get that information? That's an unsubstantiated claim by people who believe that Jackie actually won. And according to your rules, we need links in order to verify what's posted here.
|
|
|
Post by Socal Fan on Apr 12, 2020 16:18:19 GMT -5
I'll have to watch it tomorrow, on it's own and not comparing it to other performances, and see if I feel the same. It's been posted a few times and has a lot of high praise. One of the reposts below. Haven't watched it again yet: link... There are three possibilities to me. The first is she needs the pressure of a live audience to concentrate. ... I think it's your first possibility. Just before the 3rd song, she says: "I'm not in the most professional setting, I'm just sitting in my room." I think the setting is key. At the beginning of the Covid crisis, there were some sports activities played in empty stadiums without spectators. Theoretically, it should not make any difference in practice it makes a big difference. If human beings were machines, it would not make any difference but we are not machines.
|
|
|
Post by Socal Fan on Apr 12, 2020 16:42:05 GMT -5
If I recall correctly, there was some sort of technical glitch with the vote tabulations. That might have screwed up the vote in Grimm's favor. Really? Where did you get that information? That's an unsubstantiated claim by people who believe that Jackie actually won. And according to your rules, we need links in order to verify what's posted here. As indicated by my words "if I recall correctly", the source of that information is my memory. And you will note that I explicitly stated the source. Sources are very important because they allow the reader to evaluate the reliability of the information presented. The problem with some information presented on the internet is that the information is presented in a very authoritative tone and the author neglects to tell us "this is written by Joe Shmoe and this came entirely from my own imagination".
|
|
|
Post by 1 Guest on Apr 12, 2020 16:58:17 GMT -5
Really? Where did you get that information? That's an unsubstantiated claim by people who believe that Jackie actually won. And according to your rules, we need links in order to verify what's posted here. As indicated by my words "if I recall correctly", the source of that information is my memory. And you will note that I explicitly stated the source. Sources are very important because they allow the reader to evaluate the reliability of the information presented. The problem with some information presented on the internet is that the information is presented in a very authoritative tone and the author neglects to tell us "this is written by Joe Shmoe and this came entirely from my own imagination". No, you said "if I recall correctly, there WAS some sort of technical glitch", you didn't say "if I recall correctly there were rumors or there was speculation about some sort of technical glitch. Big difference. That changes the context of your comment completely.
|
|
|
Post by amg1977 on Apr 12, 2020 21:06:46 GMT -5
I just hope her audience wasn't heavy with movers and shakers in the NYC area, but that actually seems likely given the media attention that area has been getting in recent weeks.
I really doubt that since the "interthon" was not for Manhattan but Rockland County which is an outlying suburban county that includes some rather affluent locations (like Suffern where Grace's family lives) and some very poor areas. Besides, the movers and shakers have seen plenty of Grace in the last few years - most notably when she won the award as "Rising Star" at the Billboard Women in Music Awards (joining the likes of Lady Gaga, Ariana Grande, Halsey, and Kelsea Ballerini), appearing just with her uke, wowing the crowd, and giving an emotional acceptance speech. I think that would trump any sloppy performances on the internet.
|
|
|
Post by eulenspiegel on Apr 12, 2020 21:34:32 GMT -5
I just hope her audience wasn't heavy with movers and shakers in the NYC area, but that actually seems likely given the media attention that area has been getting in recent weeks.
I really doubt that since the "interthon" was not for Manhattan but Rockland County which is an outlying suburban county that includes some rather affluent locations (like Suffern where Grace's family lives) and some very poor areas. Besides, the movers and shakers have seen plenty of Grace in the last few years - most notably when she won the award as "Rising Star" at the Billboard Women in Music Awards (joining the likes of Lady Gaga, Ariana Grande, Halsey, and Kelsea Ballerini), appearing just with her uke, wowing the crowd, and giving an emotional acceptance speech. I think that would trump any sloppy performances on the internet.
Perhaps I am dumb and I critized her a lot..but this performance it totally Ok What is the problem with this performance?
|
|
|
Post by amg1977 on Apr 12, 2020 21:40:54 GMT -5
If I recall correctly, there was some sort of technical glitch with the vote tabulations. That might have screwed up the vote in Grimm's favor. I do recall some Jackie fans complaining that they couldn't get through (busy signal from call center being overwhelmed), but, presumably the same thing likely occurred with Grimm since he ended up winning. The difference is that Grimm supporters who couldn't get through did not complain since he won anyway. All the polls conducted before the finals performances had it a two way race between Jackie and Poppcock but the latter's poor performance and the buzzer by Piers Morgan (which unraveled Poppycock whose performance then deteriorated even further) totally changed the dynamics. The last of the four finalists (a dance group that used light in their act) messed up and dancers were visible when they shouldn't have been. That left it to a race between Jackie and Grimm. I think when some Poppycock fans realized their guy had no chance, they blamed Morgan for trying to "put in the fix" for Jackie and voted for the only one who had a chance to defeat Jackie (Grimm). I do remember the night of the performance there were a lot of commenting on the internet from angry Poppycock supporters saying just that and trying to get people to vote for Grimm. The polls taken after the fact (asking "who do you think should have won?") were neck and neck between Jackie and Grimm which the voting results indicated. For Grimm to go from a clear also ran to a top contender meant that he gained the vast majority of the votes Poppycock lost.
I should clarify that I am not saying Grimm did not deserve to win. He did a great job in the finals and certainly was neck and neck with Jackie in terms of a finals performance. Nor am I saying that some of those who deserted Poppycock did not vote for Grimm because they liked him. However, I do think Morgan's actions did anger enough Poppycock fans that they decided to vote for anyone but Jackie and that put Grimm over the top. If Morgan had not buzzed Poppycock, he would have lost support anyway (among those who favored Poppycock slightly over another candidate and then moved to the other) but that change would not have been as significant (since Poppycock would have been just subpar but not fall apart) and the lost vote would have been more evenly distributed. Under those circumstances, I do believe Jackie would have won the prize.
|
|
|
Post by amg1977 on Apr 12, 2020 22:37:23 GMT -5
What is the problem with this performance? Perhaps I am biased and spoiled since I have seen a lot of her (I've seen her live and I have seen a lot of concert footage), and she can be quite mesmerizing live. Most of her fans actually prefer her live to her recordings and it is usually the opposite with most of today's pop singers. I didn't say she was terrible but something definitely was, as Just Somebody put it, off kilter. Having looked at it again, I think a lot of it had to do with the instrument she was using. A number of times she had her fingers positioned correctly but the wrong note came out since it was a cheap uke that was out of tune (her fender ukes make tuning a breeze and hold the proper tenseness for a long time). I think this was distracting. Now she's made mistakes on stage before (everyone has) but she normally doubles down after that rather than just brushing it off without much concern.
I also do think socalfan was right in thinking she needs a live audience. When she performs live, she really connects with the audience. I had purchased tickets to see her live with my granddaughter (who turned me into a Grace fan) and got "meet and greet" tickets. Grace is just one of those people who can light up a room by entering it and live she normally looks like she was shot out of a cannon. Even her performances with just her uke and no band or just her and and an acoustic guitarist often end with the audience mesmerized and so quiet you could hear a pin drop. I think perhaps she feeds off her audience reactions and when she can't see them (like in her Instagram posts) she ends up being far more casual and less focused. This was certainly the case last night.
|
|
|
Post by amg1977 on Apr 13, 2020 0:06:14 GMT -5
With COVID-19 dominating the news and projections of how many hundreds of thousands of people will die, it is nice that someone took this sad time to pay tribute to one of America's most enduring musical institutions: Weird Al Yankovic.
For the uninitated, here is a few of Weird Al's catalogue of hundreds of pop star parodies:
He is truly one of whom you can truly say: "Only in America."
|
|
gern
New Member
Posts: 29
|
Post by gern on Apr 13, 2020 0:20:28 GMT -5
I think perhaps she feeds off her audience reactions and when she can't see them (like in her Instagram posts) she ends up being far more casual and less focused. That's probably it. That last song she sang wasn't bad until she started giggling. Even some more experienced singers are finding these livestream stay-at-home mini concerts a little awkward. It (basically singing to a computer screen) even less intimate than a studio recording. Here's one who settled into it for what, IMO, is a pristine homage to the late John Prine. Here's the entire set. Obviously out of her element at first.
|
|
|
Post by eulenspiegel on Apr 13, 2020 1:44:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by eulenspiegel on Apr 13, 2020 4:03:20 GMT -5
What is the problem with this performance? Perhaps I am biased and spoiled since I have seen a lot of her (I've seen her live and I have seen a lot of concert footage), and she can be quite mesmerizing live. Most of her fans actually prefer her live to her recordings and it is usually the opposite with most of today's pop singers. I didn't say she was terrible but something definitely was, as Just Somebody put it, off kilter. Having looked at it again, I think a lot of it had to do with the instrument she was using. A number of times she had her fingers positioned correctly but the wrong note came out since it was a cheap uke that was out of tune (her fender ukes make tuning a breeze and hold the proper tenseness for a long time). I think this was distracting. Now she's made mistakes on stage before (everyone has) but she normally doubles down after that rather than just brushing it off without much concern.
I also do think socalfan was right in thinking she needs a live audience. When she performs live, she really connects with the audience. I had purchased tickets to see her live with my granddaughter (who turned me into a Grace fan) and got "meet and greet" tickets. Grace is just one of those people who can light up a room by entering it and live she normally looks like she was shot out of a cannon. Even her performances with just her uke and no band or just her and and an acoustic guitarist often end with the audience mesmerized and so quiet you could hear a pin drop. I think perhaps she feeds off her audience reactions and when she can't see them (like in her Instagram posts) she ends up being far more casual and less focused. This was certainly the case last night.
But the performance is excellent. Without any sound engineer...or pimped up TV broadcast. That is exactly the problem today. Most people don‘t know anymore how a normal voice sounds. Yes, she is not Ella Fitzgerald but.. All this pimped up trash videos of all this called talents..most of the casting show talents...with 90% reverberation...Connie Talbot, Angelina Jordan etc. etc. or even worse totally playback like Jackie Evancho and many others. If they have to sing without „cheating“ it sounds bad. So her insta performance is totally OK. Even at a live concert ...you heard a pimped up sound engineer version It should be mandatory to sing in casting shows ...at least in first round...without a micro. Strange that I am the one who defends her...but it is all about being fair.
|
|
|
Post by amg1977 on Apr 13, 2020 5:39:45 GMT -5
But the performance is excellent. Without any sound engineer...or pimped up TV broadcast. That is exactly the problem today. Most people don‘t know anymore how a normal voice sounds. Yes, she is not Ella Fitzgerald but.. All this pimped up trash videos of all this called talents..most of the casting show talents...with 90% reverberation...Connie Talbot, Angelina Jordan etc. etc. or even worse totally playback like Jackie Evancho and many others. If they have to sing without „cheating“ it sounds bad. So her insta performance is totally OK. Even at a live concert ...you heard a pimped up sound engineer version It should be mandatory to sing in casting shows ...at least in first round...without a micro. Strange that I am the one who defends her...but it is all about being fair.
I never said anything about her singing. That was just fine. The problem was the series of flubs (breaking out into giggles, forgetting sections of a song, out of tune uke) were a bit unprofessional. Again, it is a matter of being fair: If I am going to criticize Jackie for her gaffes, I have to admit when I see someone I prefer at this point (Grace) give a subpar performance. It does not change my opinion on Grace and I don't consider it a big deal - she just had an off night. However, I do think she performs better before a live audience - even if it's only a camera crew (like her VEVO performances) - as it makes her more aware she is performing for a wider audience.
|
|