PDA

View Full Version : Is Eurovision turning into just another "Idol"-concept contest?



A-lister
4th May 2011, 13:47
I just had to make this thread after reading some of the comments in the rehearsals topic.

It seems to me that people are obsessing with voices and performances and that the songs aren't important any longer. I've read many comments now that goes something along the line "I don't like the song, but she has a great voice so she should qualify".

Wait a sec... so if you don't like the song why should it qualify then if it's a song contest?

Now don't get me wrong. I know performances are important integrated parts in the contest, but in the end of the day we do look for the best songs don't we?

Do we really need another Idol?

Let's see, and this is offcourse my own subjective opinion, what differs Eurovision with the "Idol" type of programs.

- Firstly Eurovision got a long history of its own and a strong concept and doesn't need to rely on others. The "Idol" concept is basically a karaoke contest concept where record companies have made TV-shows out of their auditions rather than just holding internal auditions. All "Idol" shows (Idol, X-Factor etc) are all loosely based and more or less copies of eachother and the original "Popstars" idea from 1999. With all these shows on the market, does Eurovision really have to follow?

- Eurovision is the only music show contest of its kind where the focus lies on the songs. The concept is build around having new songs competing rather than just "big" voices singing already known songs. This means that the concept is fundamentally different and staring blindly on just voices in a contest with the concept of bringing original songs, can really harm the contest and its concept and the overall song quality imo.

- Eurovision is in theory open for country's biggest names in music to compete and to showcase what's popular in those markets, wheres Idol is a concept to give a record contract to a newcomer/amateur based on singing covers.

- Whether the "Idol" concept has been multiplied 10000x times already, Eurovision still stands alone as the biggest annual music event of its kind and the fact that it's not copied a million times makes it even more unique and interesting. Do we really need to change that?

So my question is: How is Eurovision a song contest when people are forgetting the songs? :? Are people surprised that the quality in songs are falling if all focus lies on the voices and performances?

Now don't get me wrong, I KNOW that this is also a visionary show and all that and offcourse we should not overlook talent when we see/hear it, but have we totally forgotten the songs? In the end of the day looking at the bigger picture some of the most successful artists in the world may have not always been the best live singers, but they have songs that people want to hear and remembers.

It is not "Eurovision Idol", it is "Eurovision SONG Contest" afterall.

So what do you think? Are we forgetting the songs in all of this?

davids
4th May 2011, 13:53
I agree with you, but at the end of the day I think with the new voting system no bad song sung well can win, and vice versa.

A-lister
4th May 2011, 14:08
I agree with you, but at the end of the day I think with the new voting system no bad song sung well can win, and vice versa.

Actually I think since bringing back the juries the focus is unfortunately even more on just "voices" rather than songs imo.

94ayd
4th May 2011, 23:25
Well, it's impossible not to pay attention to voices when it's a LIVE performance. That's why the opinions before and after the show can vary a lot sometimes. I'd prefer keeping it mostly to songs, though it's best if the song's both great and we have a great singer performing it. ;)

doctormalisimo
4th May 2011, 23:30
Yes, it is becoming too much of a popularity contest, and it's becoming more about the performances than the songs. Take for example Sweden. Horrendous song, yet the choreography is stunning, and for some reason it's favourite to win. Eurovision is too commercialized and sexy than it should be.

AlekS
4th May 2011, 23:43
I will repeat it here as well.

If it's about songs then everybody should withdraw 8-)

Thus it will stay like it is because it can't match 1 person's taste. Just can't.

ps. Eurovision stopped being about songs when it's been broadcasted on the TV for the 1st time.
In fact performances save this crappy year for me :mrgreen:

doctormalisimo
4th May 2011, 23:45
I will repeat it here as well.

If it's about songs then everybody should withdraw.

Amen to that.

aletem
4th May 2011, 23:49
I think it is about everything: song, performance, quality of that performance, did it have a good choreography to boost up the song, was it vocally flawless or was it a nightmare to listen to; then you also have factors such as confidence, charisma, charm, your ability to connect with the audience. All these things have their say. I agree, that mostly it is the song. Sometimes song tend to be more appealing with all these factors. It is TV-show, but it definitely doesn't have an idol concept. It is not all about the vocals and we've seen this before!

AlekS
4th May 2011, 23:52
^ xyeah

+ different countries have different Idols. Btw, our X-Factor was based on ESC heavily :lol:

dogmeat
5th May 2011, 00:21
Eurovision is too commercialized and sexy than it should be.

I'm ignoring rest of the post, cause it was no more than declaring dislike towards one of entries. So, about Eurovision being "commercialized"...
I have sort of alergy on whining about commercialism, whatever context it's used in. ESC is a damn show! A show! Milions are sinking in their armchairs in front of TVs, thousands spend money to be there watching it live and have a great night. I want it noisy and flashy, i just want to entertain myself, like milions of other people. It's all for fun, not for sake of some self-claimed expert's idea of trve art. I generally like the direction this contest has been taking for past 20 years.

On the topic now...
Well, i think people on the forum are now talking about performances, just cause it's rehearsals time. After all, we know the songs for quite long now and everything that was to be said about them, has been said. But i believe at the semis and final nights, it'll be mainly songs making importance (well, i just agree with what aletem said here about many factors playing role). For the audience, at least. Only the jury doesn't fit the modern concept of the contest.

MyHeartIsYours
5th May 2011, 00:23
Only the jury doesn't fit the modern concept of the contest.

Why cuz it gives us a fair chance? :p

dogmeat
5th May 2011, 00:30
I explained it.

nikolay_BG
5th May 2011, 00:52
Why cuz it gives us a fair chance? :p

The jury does NOT give you a fair chance! I wont stop repeating that till somebody finally understands it.

A-lister
5th May 2011, 01:03
I will repeat it here as well.

If it's about songs then everybody should withdraw 8-)


So you're basically saying that it should NOT be a song contest then?

Well if it's a "show off vocal gymnastics in 3 minutes" contest then it could also be "just a radio show"... for sure we won't need a big production for a bunch of wailing singers.

Well well.. in the end of they day it's a song contest whether you like it or not but I guess you're on the team that wants to transform it to an Idol copy (again do we need another one?)

A-lister
5th May 2011, 01:04
The jury does NOT give you a fair chance! I wont stop repeating that till somebody finally understands it.

Agree with that! The juries are equally (if not more) biased than voters.

nikolay_BG
5th May 2011, 01:05
^ A good voice makes a good song :)
Or you like Krassimir Avramov :lol:

A-lister
5th May 2011, 01:06
It is TV-show, but it definitely doesn't have an idol concept. It is not all about the vocals and we've seen this before!

Well question was if it's turning into one, not that it is one today.

I see that there's more and more focus on voices rather than songs (thank you juries for that!! *irony*).

And before someone say "Lena won with not a good live voice".. well I think she's an exception.

We will see this again this year when juries will help some of those dated wailing ballads to the final that very few would pay any single attention to if (and it would not happen in 2011) those would be played on the radio.

A-lister
5th May 2011, 01:09
^ A good voice makes a good song :)
Or you like Krassimir Avramov :lol:

What?

A good voice doesn't necessarily make a good song. A good voice might HELP a song, but if a song is crap it'll be crap no matter the voice really.

I mean looking at the "good voices" in this contest most of them sing very dated banal kitschy ballads... now they can scream in 3 minutes as much as they like the songs won't get any better.

A-lister
5th May 2011, 01:13
Yes, it is becoming too much of a popularity contest, and it's becoming more about the performances than the songs. Take for example Sweden. Horrendous song, yet the choreography is stunning, and for some reason it's favourite to win. Eurovision is too commercialized and sexy than it should be.

Eurovision has ALWAYS been commercialized more or less so if it's not for your liking, I think Eurovision might be the wrong show.

About our entry, well it's kinda silly but I think it's still kinda catchy. Eurovision is about attracting the viewer with a new song in 3 minutes, it's not an easy task really.

My concern though is that we're totally forgetting the songs overall, and more based on obsession about whoever sings the best rather than even who has the best performance.

What's wrong with sexy? Thank GOD for sexy! ;) Or maybe we should have the women dressed in burqas to make the Mullahs in Iran happy? ...

nikolay_BG
5th May 2011, 01:15
What?

A good voice doesn't necessarily make a good song. A good voice might HELP a song, but if a song is crap it'll be crap no matter the voice really.
I meant that.

But I also meant that a bad vocie can totally destroy a song like it happened in 2008 & 2009 for Bulgaria for example ;)

And we don`t have good singers in the ballads only. We have also Magda Tul, Kati Wolf, Hera Bjork, Ani Lorak, the girl from sweden in 2009, Maria Haukaas Storeng for example. They have good voices and their songs are nice.

I think ESC is about the both things - a good song and a good voice. After all, I have sensitive hearing and DON`T like artists like Hadise :lol:

A-lister
5th May 2011, 01:18
^

I see your point and I agree there are good singers with non-ballads aswell.

My concern is though when songs are being overlooked and others praised only because of the voice or whatever, I think a combination is the best. I mean most are atleast decent singers, so why would a crappy entry take the spot of a better song in a song contest? To me it doesn't make sense. I can understand it if the live singer totally killed an entry, but thankfully not all are on that level of Krassimir still :lol:

I don't think your singer 2008 was bad btw.

nikolay_BG
5th May 2011, 01:21
^That`s why I don`t like the juries. Some new and cool and fresh songs can be bumped because of the same boring ballad.

A-lister
5th May 2011, 01:23
^That`s why I don`t like the juries. Some new and cool and fresh songs can be bumped because of the same boring ballad.

Agree 100%

And not that all ballads are necessarily bad and old-fashion, but for some reason in Eurovision most are and the juries seem to love it because of "quality voices".. well maybe they should be juries in Idol then and not Eurovision?

chikos_2011
5th May 2011, 01:41
im so tired of ppl saying how much they hate the songs this year. and posts like this. you only are comparing it to idol shows, because idol shows are all the rage these days. this is what happens when you have 43 songs.

there are songs you like that have shocking vocals, and it makes you hate the song (example being maybe this year Eric Saade - Sweden)

there are songs that you may hate originally but end up loving once you hear it sung well (example for me would be aloysia last year for ukraine)

there are songs that u may dislike, but the performance makes you enjoy it (example being this years ukraine)

there are so many different reasons to love and hate a song. vocals are just part of them. it doesn't mean we want to go buy their album, but a good vocal can definitley help you enjoy a song better.

at the end of the day, think about it, most people only vote once. these forums might have people making comments like 'i hope they go through cause they have a good voice, even if i don't like the song' but when you think about it properly, that doesn't mean they'll vote for that song. its just speculation and hope.

A-lister
5th May 2011, 01:49
im so tired of ppl saying how much they hate the songs this year. and posts like this.

If you hated my thread so much why did you bother answer to it then?

Now you don't have to agree with my opinion, but atleast leave the "hate" out of it please.

AlekS
5th May 2011, 01:49
Agree 100%

And not that all ballads are necessarily bad and old-fashion, but for some reason in Eurovision most are and the juries seem to love it because of "quality voices".. well maybe they should be juries in Idol then and not Eurovision?
Or maybe they should be allowed to have their own taste just like other people ... including televoters, like me for instance :rolleyes:
What's old-fashioned for you maybe is not old-fashioned for me, I have the same right to like some entries, just like you ;) , but I don't order/advice anyone how to judge a song.
I can't call ANYONE out of recent ESC top-3s old-fashioned.
Ireland 2010 was a perfect example of what you mean but she finished in the bottom-5.




So you're basically saying that it should NOT be a song contest then?
Yep. It's all about performance on ESC which consists of many many different things and factors.

If I think that there's nobody who fits my taste I'm gonna value and compare separate factors. Yes, awesome vocals too 8-)
However they mean nothing if performer is not honest or he/she can't perform it well ie. being able to deliver what you want to say via singing.

If performer is honest and knows how to perform he/she will get my vote. It's simple as that.
If he/she can do that using 2-2.5 or more octaves I'm not gonna treat him/her differently.

nikolay_BG
5th May 2011, 01:49
Agree 100%

And not that all ballads are necessarily bad and old-fashion, but for some reason in Eurovision most are and the juries seem to love it because of "quality voices".. well maybe they should be juries in Idol then and not Eurovision?

Yes. We have some improvement in ballads I think. Last year the georgian song was everything but boring. The ukrainian ballad this year also stands out from the rest of the ballads.

FallenAngelII
5th May 2011, 02:44
Actually I think since bringing back the juries the focus is unfortunately even more on just "voices" rather than songs imo.
Based on what evidence?

The juries' 2009 Top 10 included Turkey, Israel and Moldova, neither of which can be classified as powerhouse voices.

Malta's Chiara placed a measelyy 13th, which, granted, is 11 places higher than what the people placed her, but if one can do well by singing a bad song well, she'd be at least Top 10.

Lithuania's Sasha Son ended up in 20th place with less points than that given by the people.

2010 saw the jury place Portugal in 13th place, Norway in 17th, Iceland in 19th and Spain in 20th. If the juries were only concerned about singing, you'd think all of those people would've placed much higher... and that Tom Dice would've been the jury favourite instead of Lena.

You see, the people with big voices that made it into the juries' Top 10 also happened to have songs which appealed to them. In fact, the juries are instructed to focus less on singing ability and more on song quality. Singing ability still counts, but clearly, it's not that big a deal seeing as how Lena managed to win (though by a small margin to Tom Dice).

Out of the songs that made the juries' Top 10, only a few can actually be classified as "dated" and more based on who's singing the songs than the songs themselves. They are the exceptions that prove the rule.

We must also keep in mind that not all juries favour the same songs due to cultural differences. Also, who says it's the same juries every year? The juries that favoured Niamh Kavanaugh last year? It's possible that they were all sacked and replaced for this year's contest due to being blinded by her name and ignoring the fact that she was off-tune and that her song was pants.


^That`s why I don`t like the juries. Some new and cool and fresh songs can be bumped because of the same boring ballad.
And for the bajillionth time, I have to explain that "new, cool and fresh" doesn't necessarily translate to "good".

Seriously, how many of those "new, cool and fresh" songs would you have given more than 10 seconds of your time if you came upon then when channel surfing on the radio, had they never been part of Eurovision?

"New, cool and fresh", especially "New, cool and fresh for Eurovision" doesn't necessarily mean it's good. We've never had, oh, Eurobeat with accompanying Para Para in Eurovision. If I entered with a so-so song, so-so vocals and a so-so stage show, would you whine for an entire year about how unfair it as that I didn't make it? How about, say, Death Metal? Or a mediocre bitpop song? 100% rap song (badly rapped)? Bad reaggaton?

Would you have crusaded for their obviously deserved places in the final simply because they were "new, cool and fresh"? Or would you have gone "meh" and thought that they didn't deserve to make the final because you didn't like them?

See, this is the problem I have with people who complain about "new, cool and fresh" entries not making the final or doing well in the final. Either they're actually making the argument that if your entry is "new, cool and fresh", you automatically deserve to make the final and do well once there or they're just big old hypocrites upset that heir favourite entries didn't make it and cling to "new, cool and fresh" as reasons for why they should have.

Also, how the flying fig was Finland's entry last year "new and original"?! We'd seen and heard it all before! Just never from Finland or in Finnish. Etno in the mother tongue featuring unconventional instruments? Been there, done that. I guess if someone were to rip off the basics of Helena Paparizou's "My Number One" and sing it in Bulgarian, that'd be "new and original", right?

"New and original" my tuchas. People act like we've never seen something like "Työlki ellää" in Eurovisiion before. Ohm really? In 2006, Christine Guldbransen entered Eurovision for Norway singing "Alvedansen" with instances of Norwegian etno, in Norwegian and with a melody featuring traditional Norwegian instruments (on stage).

If we go back further, we'll find many entries with the same concepts. In fact, we'll find entries that kind of sound like "Työlki ellää"!


The jury does NOT give you a fair chance! I wont stop repeating that till somebody finally understands it.
You mean the juries do not give the entries you like a fair chance.

r3gg13
5th May 2011, 06:43
I wouldn't say that it has become another Idol-ized show. I

If we look back at the history of the song contest, even the recent history we can see an evidence against your claim. 08, 09, and 2010 had winning songs that didn't necessarily have amazing, belty, voices, but they had the whole "song package": a decent voice, good vibe, and a pan-European appeal.

I won't contradict, though, that singers with ballad-friendly voices are present in ESC (and there are 5 this year). However, singers like that have been present in the contest since time immemorial, and they don't "flood" the contest. We still have a good representation of various musical styles and vocals in the contest. There isn't necessarily a skew on Idol-like singers, though this year we do have a good amount of singers who have been in x-factor, idol, etc.

Of course having a great voice is not the be all and end all of ESC, because without a good song, good voices are just random noises. Good voices just help bring out the beauty of songs. For instance, Jestem, Caroban, Feel My Passion, would not sound so great if they didn't have great vocals. Still, songs like Boom Boom, Haba Haba, Popular, and TBAS don't necessarily need "quality" vocals to sound good as songs (those songs being good songs, or not, is another can of worms that I would not like to open).

It's not necessarily true that people don't care about songs anymore because we do, you do. If we only cared about voices, we would not have songs like Finland's entry this year, or like TBAS, or like So Lucky, or like Rusinka... the list goes on and on. Those are still good songs to their proper respect, and people still like them even though the might not have Idol-like vocals.

I personally like ballads and acoustic songs, but I wouldn't pass up good songs from other genres so long as the songs are given justice. Jestem, Caroban, New Tomorrow, and even Lipstick are up in my list of songs that regard well. I think that the whole essence of the song, and the whole vibe of the song is brought out by their performance, their voices and the whole package.

Milos-BC
5th May 2011, 21:13
I wouldn't say that it has become another Idol-ized show. I

If we look back at the history of the song contest, even the recent history we can see an evidence against your claim. 08, 09, and 2010 had winning songs that didn't necessarily have amazing, belty, voices, but they had the whole "song package": a decent voice, good vibe, and a pan-European appeal.

I won't contradict, though, that singers with ballad-friendly voices are present in ESC (and there are 5 this year). However, singers like that have been present in the contest since time immemorial, and they don't "flood" the contest. We still have a good representation of various musical styles and vocals in the contest. There isn't necessarily a skew on Idol-like singers, though this year we do have a good amount of singers who have been in x-factor, idol, etc.

Of course having a great voice is not the be all and end all of ESC, because without a good song, good voices are just random noises. Good voices just help bring out the beauty of songs. For instance, Jestem, Caroban, Feel My Passion, would not sound so great if they didn't have great vocals. Still, songs like Boom Boom, Haba Haba, Popular, and TBAS don't necessarily need "quality" vocals to sound good as songs (those songs being good songs, or not, is another can of worms that I would not like to open).

It's not necessarily true that people don't care about songs anymore because we do, you do. If we only cared about voices, we would not have songs like Finland's entry this year, or like TBAS, or like So Lucky, or like Rusinka... the list goes on and on. Those are still good songs to their proper respect, and people still like them even though the might not have Idol-like vocals.

I personally like ballads and acoustic songs, but I wouldn't pass up good songs from other genres so long as the songs are given justice. Jestem, Caroban, New Tomorrow, and even Lipstick are up in my list of songs that regard well. I think that the whole essence of the song, and the whole vibe of the song is brought out by their performance, their voices and the whole package.

Great post, I agree on most points!

Mickey
5th May 2011, 21:31
Eurovision is totally different to Idol/X-Factor in terms of commercialisation. The latter only exists to sell copies of the winner's song and hoover up the participants into the associated record company. Eurovision winners already enter into the contest with their own record deal and sell their songs themselves. ESC doesn't build up personalities over weeks of episodic television in the hope viewers will eventually have their posters on the wall and all buy Alexander Rybak's first autobiography. It's just three minutes, one song, judge it on its own merits.

A-lister
5th May 2011, 22:18
...

You missed my point. I clearly stated that this was my subjective opinion and people do not have to agree with me.

As for the ballad thingy... turn on any contempoarary radio channel in the western world and you won't hear anything like most of the type of ballads that we get in Eurovision... people are free to like them as much as they want though offcourse and I never said anything differently either, that wasn't my point with this topic. I was just discussing whether or not too much focus is starting to lie on the singers rather than the songs (like in Idol).

So you don't think we have enough Idol shows already? Well that's a personal opinion, I respect that but I think there's room for something else too, not everything has to work as Idol. I like a concept with a Europan SONG contest and I don't see any wrong with it, obviously it works as it's the biggest show so why transform it?

As long as the word "song" will be in Eurovision Song Contest I atleast hope it means SOMETHING. Offcourse a good singer can help a not so good song and a bad singer can make a good song look worse... but again we are not here to find the BEST voice imo (that's what we got Idol kareoke shows for).. we're hear to find the best song basically and like I wrote most singers are atleast decent enough imo.

But if they really eff it up then obviously they are unworthy winners/qualifiers, but so are the ones with BAD songs aswell and this was my whole point. I don't think a good singer should get a free ticket to the final when he/she has a song that doesn't appeal. They are not just put there to deliver a performance, the whole point (contrary to the Idol concept) is that they compete with new songs aswell.

AlekS
6th May 2011, 00:02
But if they really eff it up then obviously they are unworthy winners/qualifiers, but so are the ones with BAD songs aswell and this was my whole point. I don't think a good singer should get a free ticket to the final when he/she has a song that doesn't appeal. They are not just put there to deliver a performance, the whole point (contrary to the Idol concept) is that they compete with new songs aswell.


It's just your subjective opinion, like you say, and every single person decides for him/herself who's unworthy and who's not.
In my opinion, following your logic all contestants shouldn't qualify.

ps. Your last sentence doesn't make any sense because competing with the new songs is a part of performing ie. delivering their new song.

+ I couldn't care less about the radio. ESC video can gain more than 30 million views on YT. I'd rather watch the live ESC performance than listen to the song. That only-song conception is outdated, imo. ESC is way more than just that. My subjective opinion and people do not have to agree with me.

sannerz
6th May 2011, 05:12
I think Portugal's result last year just proves that Eurovision isn't turning into an "idol" type of contest.

adnar
6th May 2011, 10:19
Honestly for me the winning song should be a combination of good vocals, good song and nice performance. I will never vote anyone who can't sing at all. Vocals don't have to be perfect, but they have to be good, especially when the person dances at the same time.

gazzerl67
7th May 2011, 16:21
I personally think it's niave to think you can separate song from singer from performance and that any winner since the competition began has been a combination of these. Sometimes a better song has lost to a better singer / performance and that will always happen - unless you have the competition judged on paper only and I can't see that making much of a viewing spectacle

A-lister
7th May 2011, 23:25
It's just your subjective opinion...

Offcourse, that's what we do in here; write our subjective opinions.

A-lister
7th May 2011, 23:26
I think Portugal's result last year just proves that Eurovision isn't turning into an "idol" type of contest.

I think the opposite: The juries even got the wailing stuff on #2 in the semis!!

AlekS
8th May 2011, 04:06
Offcourse, that's what we do in here; write our subjective opinions.
Yep, that's what we do here; and I wrote mine.

FallenAngelII
8th May 2011, 16:59
As for the ballad thingy... turn on any contempoarary radio channel in the western world and you won't hear anything like most of the type of ballads that we get in Eurovision...Yes, and?

You won't hear anything like the pop presented in Eurovision either. Sweden's "Popular"? Where except in Sweden and a select few Nordic countries would you ever regularly hear songs like it on contemporary radio?

In fact, name 10 entries last year that were contemporary, ballad or not. Eurovision is not a bastion of contemporary Western music (quite self-centered, don't you think, completely discounting Eastern European musical tastes? Or just maybe Iberian musical tastes? Those Portuguese ballads you so derisively refer to as outdated and non-existent on contemporary Western European radio channel, they're alive and well in Portugal). And if it was, it'd be pretty boring.

sannerz
9th May 2011, 00:42
Oh, and Germany had a pop-idol contest or whatever last year, but the song that Lena represented Germany with last year was far from the typical idol ballad you see.

A-lister
9th May 2011, 00:46
Yes, and?

You won't hear anything like the pop presented in Eurovision either. Sweden's "Popular"? Where except in Sweden and a select few Nordic countries would you ever regularly hear songs like it on contemporary radio?

In fact, name 10 entries last year that were contemporary, ballad or not. Eurovision is not a bastion of contemporary Western music (quite self-centered, don't you think, completely discounting Eastern European musical tastes? Or just maybe Iberian musical tastes? Those Portuguese ballads you so derisively refer to as outdated and non-existent on contemporary Western European radio channel, they're alive and well in Portugal). And if it was, it'd be pretty boring.

I agree with the last part, but American dated ballads has nothing to do with European music nor contemporary music so where do they fit really?

As for the rest, you know very well by now I'm probably one of the strongest voices pro- local styles and ethnic music taking part, but that's because they are representative of EUROPEAN culture.. but again American ballads from the 90's how are they representative of anything European really?

Anyways that wasn't the topic so we got a little off-topic here.

nikolay_BG
9th May 2011, 01:06
I agree with the last part, but American dated ballads has nothing to do with European music nor contemporary music so where do they fit really.

Yeah! That`s the reason why I don`t like the romanian and the austrian songs this year. I can`t find anything european in them. In matter of fact they sound 100% american to me. And we are speaking about Eurovision here after all. Not americavision.

sannerz
9th May 2011, 01:10
Yeah! That`s the reason why I don`t like the romanian and the austrian songs this year. I can`t find anything european in them. In matter of fact they sound 100% american to me. And we are speaking about Eurovision here after all. Not americavision.

:lol:
There is nothing Bulgarian or "European" about Bulgaria's song. Just the language itself, the music and the vocals sound extremely "American" to me, whatever that means.

nikolay_BG
9th May 2011, 01:19
:lol:
There is nothing Bulgarian or "European" about Bulgaria's song. Just the language itself, the music and the vocals sound extremely "American" to me, whatever that means.

I don`t agree. The language is big part of our song and I think this is the bulgarian part of the song. Pop rock isn`t only produced in USA, but in many european countries too.
I think the bulgarian song is a classical ESC song - european sound in national language.

Now does that aply to the romanian or the austrian song?
Both of the songs sound like an "idol" songs to me TBH xafro

sannerz
9th May 2011, 01:28
I don`t agree. The language is big part of our song and I think this is the bulgarian part of the song. Pop rock isn`t only produced in USA, but in many european countries too.
I think the bulgarian song is a classical ESC song - european sound in national language.

Now does that aply to the romanian or the austrian song?
Both of the songs sound like an "idol" songs to me TBH xafro

Just like with pop rock, soulful ballads are also NOT only produced in the USA, just because they are not song in their own country's language doesn't mean that the Romanian or Austrian songs are more American than Bulgaria's song. The argument you used to make valid BUlgaria's "European" sound can easily be switched for Romania's or Austria's. Either way, Bulgaria's song may sound "European" but it by no means sounds Bulgarian in terms of musical composition.

nikolay_BG
9th May 2011, 01:42
Just like with pop rock, soulful ballads are also NOT only produced in the USA, just because they are not song in their own country's language doesn't mean that the Romanian or Austrian songs are more American than Bulgaria's song. The argument you used to make valid BUlgaria's "European" sound can easily be switched for Romania's or Austria's. Either way, Bulgaria's song may sound "European" but it by no means sounds Bulgarian in terms of musical composition.

Estonia 2009 doesn`t sound so estonian to me in musical composition, but the language makes a very big difference. Can you imagine Randajad performed in english from Estonia in 2009 and having the same success? I don`t know about you, but I can`t.

FallenAngelII
9th May 2011, 02:00
I agree with the last part, but American dated ballads has nothing to do with European music nor contemporary music so where do they fit really?
What about dated "American pop songs"? We hear tons of them every year, yet very few people get up in arms about hem.

And since when are "American" ballad different from Western European ballads, anyway? You do realize that the UK, Ireland, U.S., Germany and (partially) the Nordic states all share the same style in ballads, right?

It's not an "American" style, it's a "Western" style.


As for the rest, you know very well by now I'm probably one of the strongest voices pro- local styles and ethnic music taking part, but that's because they are representative of EUROPEAN culture..
But why should the contest be only about that? Then it becomes a contest of whose musical cultural heritage resonates the most with other countries (hint: It's probably the ones with the most "Western"-sounding sound with just a few touches of "Eastern". Get ready for decades of Greece and Turkey dominating the Eurovision scoreboards as long as they don't mess up).


but again American ballads from the 90's how are they representative of anything European really?
See above.

Name some of the recent "American ballads from the 90's" that have been in the ESC and I'll drag up a bajillion examples of similar-sounding ballads from Europe.

That's like saying disco has no place in Eurovision because it originated in the U.S. Or... soul. Or... rap. Or... really, pretty much anything because Europe has originated very few genres of music besides local etno-based genres.

Is that what you want, the Eurovision Etno Contest?


Estonia 2009 doesn`t sound so estonian to me in musical composition, but the language makes a very big difference. Can you imagine Randajad performed in english from Estonia in 2009 and having the same success? I don`t know about you, but I can`t.
That's because it was etno pop. Also, yes, I can see it. If Greec and Turkey can pull it off, why can't Estonia? And you know what? I think Randajäd would've done better had they sung in English. The televoters didn't favour them anywhere near as much as the juries, probably at least partially due to the language barrier.

Among the average viewer, very few viewers actually vote according to whether or not someone is singing in their native language. They vote if they like the song and/or performance. Estonian is not a widely spoken language. It also isn't similar to that many languages. Thus, singing in Estonia doesn't give you the same reach as singing in, say, Russian.

Depending on how well the group could sing in English and the English translation, they could've done better had they sung in English.

Let's use your argument in reverse. You think Elena Paparizou's "My Number One" and Sertab's "Any Way That I Can" would've won had they been performed in their native languages?

94ayd
9th May 2011, 02:52
Ethnic songs don't benefit from boring English lyrics that destroy everything special and/or mystical about it, especially about Estonia 2009's case. ;) And I have to say that both of our last entries sounded very Bulgarian. I can't say what it is but there's something about them that I'd guess it was a song made here, even if sung by an Englishman, for example.

A-lister
9th May 2011, 17:09
^
Agree!

Part of the success of Estona 2009 I think was the language...

nikolay_BG
9th May 2011, 23:15
Please point out these alleged contradictions in my posts in this thread or immediately retract that statement and write a public apology.

I`ll try with one.
I said that "Tyolki Ella" was a masterpiece and you continuously posted that I said that "Alvedansen" is a masterpiece when I never said that.

AlekS
10th May 2011, 14:28
All off topping was deleted. Stick to the topic of the thread when you find really valuable arguments.

A-lister
10th May 2011, 23:52
After Semifinal 1 I think my theory is true: this is no longer a song contest, it's purely and Idol contest.

The song quality doesn't matter as long as you sing it good. Next year change the name to "European Idol" and let the contestants sing covers instead, because the songs clearly have no meaning in all of this.

FallenAngelII
11th May 2011, 00:47
After Semifinal 1 I think my theory is true: this is no longer a song contest, it's purely and Idol contest.

The song quality doesn't matter as long as you sing it good. Next year change the name to "European Idol" and let the contestants sing covers instead, because the songs clearly have no meaning in all of this.Uh... what?

The only entry with a sucky song that arguably made it due to good vocals was Lithuania. Switzerland had a sweet, harmless song that's a grower, but it's not very bad. Every other entry featured at least partially wonky vocals. So how 2 out of 10 qualifiers being at largely thanks to a good singing voice proves you right is beyond me.

A-lister
11th May 2011, 00:54
Uh... what?

The only entry with a sucky song that arguably made it due to good vocals was Lithuania. Switzerland had a sweet, harmless song that's a grower, but it's not very bad. Every other entry featured at least partially wonky vocals. So how 2 out of 10 qualifiers being at largely thanks to a good singing voice proves you right is beyond me.

It's my opinion, you are free to disagre though.

I think this goes for Lithuania, Iceland, Switzerland and Finland.

But offcourse that's just my personal opinion.

But mostly people agree on Lithuania though.. that was just a bad joke to me.

lucian-crusher
11th May 2011, 01:01
::lt qualification proves you where right A-lister!

I don't agree on ::is! I think it was voted by the people because of the sad story! :((

FallenAngelII
11th May 2011, 12:14
I think this goes for Lithuania, Iceland, Switzerland and Finland.

But offcourse that's just my personal opinion.

But mostly people agree on Lithuania though.. that was just a bad joke to me.
Yes, everyone agrees on Lithuania being a bad song carried by a good songstress. The other 3, however, had ther things working for them:
* Finland - Like Tom Dice last year, Paradise Oscar was an audience favourite in the arena. His youth, easy-going charm and plain likeability probaby endeared him to televoters, enough so that even without juey points, he would've gone through. The song itself is a melodious singer-songwriter ditty that is atually quite competent, if you ignore the lyrics.
* Switzerland - This is a grower. It is described as a "real song". Feel-good music that can do well on the radio. It's not somethin that captures most people's interest after only on listening but the juries are instruted to listen to all songs multiple times.
* Iceland - I doubt this one got more jury points than televoting points. The sad story strikes again.

A-lister
13th May 2011, 13:15
The juries must be really happy now they got both Lithuania and Austria through to the final.

3 minutes of vocal gymnastics ftw... a song contest? oh it doesn't matter what song you got if you can wail your way through something.

AlekS
13th May 2011, 16:27
^ If you aren't able to get what the song is about it's actually your problem.

FallenAngelII
13th May 2011, 16:51
The juries must be really happy now they got both Lithuania and Austria through to the final.

3 minutes of vocal gymnastics ftw... a song contest? oh it doesn't matter what song you got if you can wail your way through something.
Obviously, if you don't like a song, it's obviously a bad song. Meanwhile, you're also rootin for "Popular". Does not compute.