|
|
Post by Painted the Tail on Oct 11, 2023 19:14:46 GMT -5
The man before me is a OTT member 100% . Most likely OTH also ( over the hill ) He is a love-sick Jackie fan . As a Jackie fan from the beginning, I find this absolutely fascinating. It's so cool to watch the adult Jackie watching the 10 year old Jackie perform on AGT, while explaining what she was thinking and feeling at the time. It's great to see her in such a relaxed state and calm demeanor. She look's healthy here too and she offered a genuine smile. |
|
|
|
Post by donkey on Oct 11, 2023 19:32:37 GMT -5
Willie Nelson is another example. Not what you might call a brilliant singer, but incredibly unique singing voice and hugely talented storyteller. So you are saying that one can achieve success with not necessarily a good voice but an unusual voice instead. I agree. GraceV has a raspy voice that many fans like. Also Louis Armstrong. And many others. An unusual voice isn't a "talent" or special ability but it does help to make a singer noticed. I guess it depends on how you define a "good voice". There is some subjectivity there. Are you defining it as a technically good singer....someone who is classically trained? Because that's not how I'm defining it. For instance, I listen to Phil Colins, or Elton John, or Dolly Parton sing...and I think, "WOW, what a great voice ...they can really sing well." I don't mean that in a technical sense, classically trained sense. Willie Nelson is a fantastic singer, not because he's trained and sings everything technically correctly, but because his voice is not just unique, but soothing, old soul sounding, and he's a great storyteller with his voice. and he sings on key most of the time...that helps. lol Was Kenny Rogers a good singer? I certainly think so...he sold a lot of records, that's for sure. |
|
|
|
Post by richard on Oct 11, 2023 19:45:08 GMT -5
Far cry from Mike-E not allowing cameras and taking down youtubes from all the people he claims are stealing from Jackie. Hasn't happened in years (more recent camera bans are venue policy - not everywhere, distracts fellow patrons; most allow non-flash still photos). Lose the ancient history talking points. What do you want, them to pay extra for a photographer, recording rights, the venue cut, the musician's cut, and then put it on YouTube free? if you're making millions, that might be a PR tax write-off, but otherwise it's a thou or more for a few hundred likes, not remotely break-even even if it was 100,000 views. Why is it that just Jackie seems to get the venues that don't allow video's. All the others would probably pass on such venues. It's a no-brainer all the smart phone manufactures main selling points are always the cameras and the great videos they take. People that buy these devices want to be able to use them at concerts. Apple went so far as to shoot Olivia Rodrigo's "Get him Back" video with just their new smart phone they released in Junction with her music video.
Olivia and other artist don't even need to have professionals filming their concerts as there are plenty of people there that releases them on their youtube channel.
Olivia with Billy Joel taken by someone with only 957 subscribers that went to the show and got 1.3m views.
Olivia Rodrigo & Avril Lavigne - Complicated (Toronto 1 2022) someone released a smartphone video.
People will release her complete concert and not worry about her coming after them. Sometime she will link a video someone took of her concert in her instagram stories.
It doesn't matter if Mike isn't as active now in trying to take video of Jackie's down the fact the he did it just shows his mindset which is completely different the the managers of celebrities that are doing great.
|
|
|
|
Post by BOGC on Oct 11, 2023 21:04:13 GMT -5
It's a no-brainer all the smart phone manufactures main selling points are always the cameras and the great videos they take. IMO they're meh unless you have external stereo mics plugged in. And the cameras while great in normal lighting, struggle with a dark stage and spotlit performer, esp. wearing something sparkly or very light colored. iPhone X could not do decent stills then; 12 Pro Max could, with some luck (not going to fiddle with controls when mainly watching and listening, rather than taking photos or video). Clubs and outdoor venues probably don't give a darn, by and large, unless the performer insists on a ban. Venues that deal more with polite civilized audiences that don't bother each other and know not to even applaud until after the last note, rather than party animal audiences that scream and wave and dance and applaud whenever they please (and probably throw tomatoes if they hate it) are likelier to have their own position restricting these things; taking video with a phone has the screen visible and distracting people near you unless the brightness is way down, and it probably blocks someone's view, too. Rudeness acceptable among those who don't know better, but not otherwise, I've had people get p!ssed at me for just taking set list notes on the phone, with the brightness as low as I could still read. You clearly do not understand the difference between civilized (not stuck up or boring, just considerate!) and animals. I sympathize with the conservative somewhat there, because taking photos (which I do if allowed) or video (not so much) distracts _me_ too. To get a decent video would require the right location, a really good phone camera, external mics as mentioned, some skill, someone that was willing to pay attention to taking video rather than really watching, and being allowed. But the rights thing is still a problem. Unless the contracts are all written to allow it, it does cost extra to have an "official" recording even if not really a professional one. It would take a lawyer or at least an experienced producer (which a manager isn't) at such things to sort it all out. It would take a recording license for all the music and the agreement of the venue and everyone on stage (most of whom would want a cut either upfront or of any revenue it generated from views; they might suck it up and settle for the latter if everyone was named in acknowledgements). Do whatever you want is Church of Satan and/or young folks philosophy, but doing it without getting burned (either now or later in a really hot place) is tricky. |
|
|
|
Post by richard on Oct 11, 2023 21:29:30 GMT -5
It's a no-brainer all the smart phone manufactures main selling points are always the cameras and the great videos they take. IMO they're meh unless you have external stereo mics plugged in. And the cameras while great in normal lighting, struggle with a dark stage and spotlit performer, esp. wearing something sparkly or very light colored. iPhone X could not do decent stills then; 12 Pro Max could, with some luck (not going to fiddle with controls when mainly watching and listening, rather than taking photos or video). Clubs and outdoor venues probably don't give a darn, by and large, unless the performer insists on a ban. Venues that deal more with polite civilized audiences that don't bother each other and know not to even applaud until after the last note, rather than party animal audiences that scream and wave and dance and applaud whenever they please (and probably throw tomatoes if they hate it) are likelier to have their own position restricting these things; taking video with a phone has the screen visible and distracting people near you unless the brightness is way down, and it probably blocks someone's view, too. Rudeness acceptable among those who don't know better, but not otherwise, I've had people get p!ssed at me for just taking set list notes on the phone, with the brightness as low as I could still read. You clearly do not understand the difference between civilized (not stuck up or boring, just considerate!) and animals. I sympathize with the conservative somewhat there, because taking photos (which I do if allowed) or video (not so much) distracts _me_ too. To get a decent video would require the right location, a really good phone camera, external mics as mentioned, some skill, someone that was willing to pay attention to taking video rather than really watching, and being allowed. But the rights thing is still a problem. Unless the contracts are all written to allow it, it does cost extra to have an "official" recording even if not really a professional one. It would take a lawyer or at least an experienced producer (which a manager isn't) at such things to sort it all out. It would take a recording license for all the music and the agreement of the venue and everyone on stage (most of whom would want a cut either upfront or of any revenue it generated from views; they might suck it up and settle for the latter if everyone was named in acknowledgements). Do whatever you want is Church of Satan and/or young folks philosophy, but doing it without getting burned (either now or later in a really hot place) is tricky. That's alright none of the major players are wanting to take Jackie''s dainty little no videoing allowed concerts of about 300 people. Ones like Olivia and Billie Eilish would rather take the arenas with around 20k range and about 75 of them at a tour an actually encourage videos. So that they can show all their friends what they missed and what a good time they had. Like this guy that Olivia discovered his instagram and reposted it of course the guy was ecstatic when he looked at his instagram and found it had gotten thousands of likes even by Olivia. Does Jackie even do that. Also his short vid looks quite good even in the low lighting and everyone seems to have their phone out and it doesn't look distracting to me. One more reason Jackie will never be able to have a concert with both her older fans and young ones. The younger ones don't want to sit with a bunch of old grumpy men that complain about everything.
|
|
|
|
Post by Painted the Tail on Oct 11, 2023 21:41:07 GMT -5
See, I don't think they have "average" voices. ... Just hearing an audio of them singing, you know immediately it's Elton John, or MJ, or Paul McCartney, or Mick Jacgger. Mabye we disagree on what an "average" voice is. I don't think there is anything average about those voices. I think they are highly talented vocally. Very interesting issue. Does anyone else have an opinion? It appears that the singers with the most talent are those in the "Baby Shark Dance" - the video has over 13 Billion views! The 2nd most talented singer must be Luis Fonsi has a video with 8.2 Billion views |
|
|
|
Post by BOGC on Oct 11, 2023 21:53:12 GMT -5
Like this guy that Olivia discovered his instagram and reposted it of course the guy was ecstatic when he looked at his instagram and found it had gotten thousands of likes even by Olivia. Does Jackie even do that. Also his short vid looks quite good even in the low lighting and everyone seems to have their phone out and it doesn't look distracting to me. One more reason Jackie will never be able to have a concert with both her older fans and young ones. The younger ones don't want to sit with a bunch of old grumpy men that complain about everything.
Pretty sure Jackie posted at least one fan-taken video. It's not about complaining about everything, it's about not being rude to people that want to pay attention to the music rather than throw themselves into a mosh pit like rutting animals. Anyone who can't figure out what the people around them are doing and go along a little is not human yet (and if they keep that up, may never be). If I went to a place where people danced in the aisles, maybe I would too (two left feet, the right one of which often hurts, and minimal sense of rhythm make that probably not a great idea), or at least I'd try to look enthusiastic or do what in a civilized place would be rude (cheer, wave, sing along) and stay out of their way. |
|
|
|
Post by Socal Fan on Oct 11, 2023 22:08:32 GMT -5
It appears that the singers with the most talent are those in the "Baby Shark Dance" - the video has over 13 Billion views! ... The 2nd most talented singer must be Luis Fonsi has a video with 8.2 Billion views That's only if you assume the singer was the reason for the popularity of the videos. It could be songwriter or the director or the choreographer or the person who marketed the videos or some combination of the above. Or it could have been just dumb luck. |
|
|
|
Post by Socal Fan on Oct 11, 2023 22:13:57 GMT -5
throw themselves into a mosh pit like rutting animals Sadly, very few Jackie fans still have the testosterone or estrogen levels they need to be rutting animals. |
|
|
|
Post by BOGC on Oct 11, 2023 22:38:50 GMT -5
throw themselves into a mosh pit like rutting animals Sadly, very few Jackie fans still have the testosterone or estrogen levels they need to be rutting animals. DHEA for both; for the women, light on the DHEA but flaxseed and soybeans too. (Guys, go easy on the soybeans.) Even Walmart has DHEA, flaxseed, and soymilk. It's not like hormone injections, but they can make a difference. And people's gonads don't wither at 40. In some cases, not even later. Nor are they relevant to enthusiasm or (within non-rowdy limits) spontaneity. One can dance and cheer without hormones (some of us did very little of that even in our teens when we were definitely NOT deficient; just not natural party animals). If they're influencing public behavior beyond that, that's probably a bit too aggressive anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by richard on Oct 11, 2023 22:55:24 GMT -5
It appears that the singers with the most talent are those in the "Baby Shark Dance" - the video has over 13 Billion views! ... The 2nd most talented singer must be Luis Fonsi has a video with 8.2 Billion views That's only if you assume the singer was the reason for the popularity of the videos. It could be songwriter or the director or the choreographer or the person who marketed the videos or some combination of the above. Or it could have been just dumb luck. The Baby Shark Dance is an entertainment video for little kids. Millions of moms sit the kids down and they enjoy it some may even be to young to talk yet. |
|
|
|
Post by 1 Guest on Oct 11, 2023 23:05:41 GMT -5
IMO they're meh unless you have external stereo mics plugged in. And the cameras while great in normal lighting, struggle with a dark stage and spotlit performer, esp. wearing something sparkly or very light colored. iPhone X could not do decent stills then; 12 Pro Max could, with some luck (not going to fiddle with controls when mainly watching and listening, rather than taking photos or video). Clubs and outdoor venues probably don't give a darn, by and large, unless the performer insists on a ban. Venues that deal more with polite civilized audiences that don't bother each other and know not to even applaud until after the last note, rather than party animal audiences that scream and wave and dance and applaud whenever they please (and probably throw tomatoes if they hate it) are likelier to have their own position restricting these things; taking video with a phone has the screen visible and distracting people near you unless the brightness is way down, and it probably blocks someone's view, too. Rudeness acceptable among those who don't know better, but not otherwise, I've had people get p!ssed at me for just taking set list notes on the phone, with the brightness as low as I could still read. You clearly do not understand the difference between civilized (not stuck up or boring, just considerate!) and animals. I sympathize with the conservative somewhat there, because taking photos (which I do if allowed) or video (not so much) distracts _me_ too. To get a decent video would require the right location, a really good phone camera, external mics as mentioned, some skill, someone that was willing to pay attention to taking video rather than really watching, and being allowed. But the rights thing is still a problem. Unless the contracts are all written to allow it, it does cost extra to have an "official" recording even if not really a professional one. It would take a lawyer or at least an experienced producer (which a manager isn't) at such things to sort it all out. It would take a recording license for all the music and the agreement of the venue and everyone on stage (most of whom would want a cut either upfront or of any revenue it generated from views; they might suck it up and settle for the latter if everyone was named in acknowledgements). Do whatever you want is Church of Satan and/or young folks philosophy, but doing it without getting burned (either now or later in a really hot place) is tricky. That's alright none of the major players are wanting to take Jackie''s dainty little no videoing allowed concerts of about 300 people. Ones like Olivia and Billie Eilish would rather take the arenas with around 20k range and about 75 of them at a tour an actually encourage videos. So that they can show all their friends what they missed and what a good time they had. Like this guy that Olivia discovered his instagram and reposted it of course the guy was ecstatic when he looked at his instagram and found it had gotten thousands of likes even by Olivia. Does Jackie even do that. Also his short vid looks quite good even in the low lighting and everyone seems to have their phone out and it doesn't look distracting to me. One more reason Jackie will never be able to have a concert with both her older fans and young ones. The younger ones don't want to sit with a bunch of old grumpy men that complain about everything.
Fans would much prefer and enjoy videos that aren't technically perfect to no video at all. You know what they sang and get a general idea of the show and atmosphere. That goes for Jackie's fans as well. It's a safe bet that even BOGC watches all of the smart phone videos from Jackie's shows and prefer them to nothing at all.  |
|
|
|
Post by richard on Oct 12, 2023 0:00:01 GMT -5
Tate McRae is the third artist born in this century to hit 5 billion Spotify streams. Even at just .003 per stream that still is a good size payday for a 20 year old. http://instagram.com/p/CyRa_YZpydE |
|
|
|
Post by April for sex on Oct 12, 2023 0:01:03 GMT -5
throw themselves into a mosh pit like rutting animals Sadly, very few Jackie fans still have the testosterone or estrogen levels they need to be rutting animals. Lol SoCal! |
|
|
|
Post by BOGC on Oct 12, 2023 0:22:08 GMT -5
Fans would much prefer and enjoy videos that aren't technically perfect to no video at all. You know what they sang and get a general idea of the show and atmosphere. That goes for Jackie's fans as well. It's a safe bet that even BOGC watches all of the smart phone videos from Jackie's shows and prefer them to nothing at all. Sure. But when I listen to a video of something I was there for, it's a poor ghost of the real thing. A good phone or pocket camera may be good enough for the visuals, but anything less than a feed from the house sound system (i.e. a semi-official video) falls FAR short. If I watch the two duets with Rachel again, it's recalling the memory of seeing something anticipated for years, not so much for the sound, which was far better. |
|
