Entertainers vs Musicians

[thor666]

I think that's about it.

 

[newbie100]

excellent musician dun necessary make good entertainers
excellent entertainters dun necessary must be good musician

to make it in the pop arena,
a good entertainer is more important than musicianship

 

[3notesAbar]

Sad but true these days. But do add that if the fella totally cannot play or sing, I think they are only entitled to their 30 secs of fame. Relative, but maybe 30 secs in SG idol, 8 episodes in AM idol, and some weird deals Mr.Hung got over there. I don't think hes gonna bang the charts like Bo Bice or Clay Aiken.....

 

[Crawldaddy]

Hmm.

personally, entertaining the crowd is a mix of both aural and visual elements. There really isn't any 'pure' entertainer (think of action movies without music, or sound effects, or musicians who can't smile or work the crowd). Anyways, I can never bring myself to call myself a musician. Because I'm just a player, and a singer. That's it :wink:

 

[atee]

It all depends on how you define entertain. Something along the lines of holding onto your attention, maybe? For me you don't have to have showmanship to entertain - I will be very much entertained if I watched a good musician (with less colourful personality than others), maybe the said Norah Jones, play, because of her good music.

Some people probably have another defination of the musicians' form of entertainment, i.e. in bands where members would actually prefer vocalists with more showmanship, rather than the stand-on-one-spot singers.

 

[3notesAbar]

This thread is great

I agree with what Fored said, that it depends on how we look at entertainment. But thing is, even in the most commercial forms of entertainment alone, there are so many types of artistes. Some speak to you with their attitude and public behaviour, others use their 'musical-message' more etc etc. Visual and aural things become less of a concern and more of a detail in this light. My point is (still), does it really matter? As Robbie Williams sang recently, "let me entertain you..". Nobody's being forced, its a free world, and yes, any Way is good if you don't screw up!

 

[Rollercoaster]

In my opinion, I believe an entertainer is more like Kiss, Slash and Zakk Wylde who puts on an stage act, whereas a musician foucus more on their music instead of moving around on stage, kinda like Eric Johnson and Neil Young.

 

[dhalif]

play symphony x with a very tight band running around stage naked is the middle spot on ur diagram thor..

 

[ShredCow]

dahlif = entertainment.

Some bands don't have to move a lot to entertain and rock the house... very few can. Death is an example. They just stand there and do their thing, its quite an experience.

 

[Rollercoaster]

Anyone saw the band who poses as monsters on the news last night? They are entertainers and very good in their own right...

 

[dhalif]

see if shredcow performs with a cow suit and its huge tits spraying milk everywhere when he starts shredding.. entertainment.

 

[ShredCow]

dun so defensive lah boy

was just posting in relation to your humorous post on playing Sym X nekkid!

that twas a funny post!

 

[dhalif]

??? defensive? u siao ah?

 

[ShredCow]

Only with you man, only with you......... :wink:

Aiyah, okay, git back on da topic la.

Youtube, search for Death , the band.

 

[madmonkeykungfu]

entertaining musician

Lordi = Eurovision Final 20.05.06 - Hard Rock Hallelujah
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LgJYCK-6hE&feature=Views&page=1&t=t&f=b

 

[kissntell]

my opinion is the people on the floor infront of the stage tt define the type of music tt will be played on the stage...u know like wads the point of doin much if just some pentatonic scales can wow the crowd, or if they dont understand the popping and slapping...I guess its definitely more worth it if u play the more complicated stuff to other musicians, rather thn the groupies or the crowd...I believe one has to be an entertainer to be a good musician.in the end ur popularity is reliant on the crowd's reaction. :roll: