Visual appearance........how important is it it?

Posted: Sat Apr 12, 2003 6:46 pm

I'm in Brisbane Dude... Howboutchu?

Posted: Sat Apr 12, 2003 9:39 pm

Newcastle, in the beautiful Hunter Valley..........home of Australia's finest wines.

Cool

Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2003 10:03 am

Wazzup People!

I agree that todays performers/bands either have to be "pretty" or have a definite image. That being said, I don't know if any of you have ever watched FOX's American Idol. One of the guys still making the grade week after week is Rueben, who without doubt could lose a few pounds. (I don't really watch it myself, but my 11 year old daughter is hooked on the show.) He may be big, but he has that "teddy bear" quality. What about Marilyn Manson? The MoFo is so ugly he had to cover it up with that outrageous image. In the post-MTV era the key I guess, to take a negative and turn it into an asset or just cover it up. God knows even in my prime I would barely have qualified by todays standards.

:p:

Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2003 3:05 pm

I would like to add some of the female logic (no comments please) on this issue. Smile

Whatever works. All of these people have a definite image that they stick by.

Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2003 4:04 pm

Laura (I may call you Laura? Very Happy

), and one point that came out of that discussion was that it is always possible to turn a negative into a positive............similar to your "cute boy with personality/stud with attitude" thang.

If, as in the present case, the bass player is rather "solidly built" without the height to match to put it politely, ......aahh damn it.........he's built like a brick shit house Very Happy

, one option is to get him to almost flaunt it, to take an aggresive approach to his whole "on stage/live" image............kind of like saying visually to an audience....."I'm THE bass player......if you don't like it, well tough!!!" Whether he has the confidence to do this is another matter though.

Time will tell.

BTW, welcome to RO.

Cool

Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2003 10:01 am

has anyone seen Moby or Badly Drawn Boy?

those guys are extremely createive...and they have to be, because their appearance is borderline offensive!

if the music speaks, they will listen...they may not put your poster above their bed, but they will listen.

thank YOU for listening!
shine

Posted: Thu May 01, 2003 9:13 am

I saw New found Glory last summer and they basically make a spectacle of their fat ass bass player, even going as far as playing a simple beat and getting the crowd to chant "take it off" while the bass player strips down to his boxers on stage! While I would agree that this is considered "punk" music and this type of behavior would not fit well with some other types of music but, if your bass player is in to it see if he would go along! hehe If the kid can play then and melds well with the other memebers than I don't think its fair to him to kick him out cause he's not a pretty boy! just my $.02

Posted: Mon May 19, 2003 9:11 am

Myself being a frontman, I have always cared more about musicianship and performance issues from my supporting members, than just good stage presence. In vocal music your key focus is on the singer. You can always gain more confidence in your stage presence as time goes by from working a stage throughout the years. I feel if your frontman can pull his weight, the rest is just icing on the cake! But I am old school, and talent beats out looks everytime!

Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2003 2:22 pm

First off, love any thread that seriously contemplates the good looks of BTO. Nice.

It's really hard to think of even average looking folks who make it, even in "indie." Hip hop is the big exception, plenty of real fat guys there, but that's a different story.

For what it's worth, Dave Matthews was thin and incredibly handsome, and at the exact moment that he broke, got a little tubby. Not tubby like, say, this author, but tubby for a rockstar. He's now a good bit thinner again.

Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2003 4:17 pm

You know, I didn't really watch this show, but the bedroom is right behind my office, and my Wife enjoyed the "American Idol" series...

The guy who won this year wasn't exactly a candidate for GQ magazine... I can only assume that in the American public's eyes, talent still takes the stage. I guess we will learn more as record companies begin to try and market this artist.

Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2003 4:32 pm

There is considerable talk that the "American Idol" competition was fixed in at least the final voting stages. I don't think we can take any of these "Reality TV" competitions seriously. I don't think any of these people, Kelly Clarkson included, would make it in the real world with a real record company. Another trend I have noticed in American Idol competition is the tendency of all the artists to pick "R&B" songs to compete with. This is very unrealistic IMO as R&B does not constitute the majority of record sales. I believe that County is the largest seller but it is rarely represented in these competitions. I think "American Idol" is aimed at the 11 to 16 year olds that Lou Pearlman is going after .... Kurt

Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2003 10:32 am

Hi folks,

I don't usually touch the ugly/pretty threads..... i shouldn't throw stones and all that - BUT (big but wasn't it?) unfortunately i have to agree with Kurt on this one (not unfortunate that i have to agree with you Kurt - just unfortunate you're right about this - that our world is that way)

In the years of radio / vinyl records - talent mattered much more than it does today - today it's all about packaging..... and the foolish sheep of the world make it so.

Everything is visualy oriented - hell we even use images in here to represent our persona.....

But the real question is not ugly vrs pretty here - it is presentation........... for the particular genre that the artist works in.

Today - someone like meatloaf (i believe) could still become famous - because the people who like that musical style would accept him. He would not however make it as a country musician with his presentation.

So to answer the real original question - put aside your personal opinions of the appearence - and look at the leading preformers in that genre - that is what the poeple listening to expect - and then ask yourself - do they fit?

As far as the bullsh.. TV "reality shows" go - i make it a habit to never watch - and yes - from what i've heard everything was decided long in advance - and all of the loosers that were shown crying and screaming and bad mouthing after - those were all shoots - just so the wonderful public could see someone humiliated. They bopught into it just for the sake of their "15 minutes of fame"

Happy Hunting

Rod

Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2003 11:04 am

Yep, you guys are right about the Reality TV shows. They might be 10% reality (at most) and 90% rigged, but it is amazing how many people buy into the "reality" of it.

It just goes to show how important the "packaging" is. Like my dad has always told me, even if you "package" poopoo (he uses a different term) right, millions of people will beat a path to you to buy it. For example, the Clintons are masters of packaging, look at the elections they won while being life-long, chronic pathological liars. (You could say politicians in general are liars, which in many cases is true, but the Clintons take the cake.) Packaging is the key.

Talent will always be successful in the long run, packaging just makes the journey much shorter. But in the short run (especially in this "now" generation), good packaging will make anything successful for a while.

Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2003 10:56 am

Good music is good music, and good business is good business. The two shake hands long enough to marry for the purposes of entertainment. Entertainment is the reason music sells. In the old days people were entertained by radio. Then tv. Nowadays people watch and listen for a variety of reasons, looks, sex appeal, artistic value, because it's cool or thier "crowd" listens to or watches something.

To effectively sell a new band it is prudent to ensure that you have as many bases covered so that yu can appeal to a broader market and sell more discs.
I don't think it's fair to say that the public would reject good music because dude is ugly, I do think it's fair to say that the labels might though.

Just a thought.

Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2003 5:17 am

Geez, this thread just keeps bobbing up to the surface every so often Smile

.

Well, the long and the short of the specific situation is that for reasons primarily other than his appearance, the "large" bass player won't be joining the band.

However, it has been interesting to see how different people viewed the issue, so MANY THANKS to those who took time to respond.

Cool

This topic sponsored by: