Too many new K-pop idol groups debuting...my assessment.

[cronodroid]

Hey guys! I'm Crono. This is just a quickie regarding my favorite Meta topic: the K-pop industry. Mind dump warning…

Comments

[iacus]

The idea of an objective judgment being possible for subjective things such as beauty, art, etc, is a very comforting thought. It means that it is possible for us to pick the “right” thing to like, and it gives us reasons for liking said thing. I don't just think Im Yoona is a pretty woman, I know she is prettier than any other; I don't just like song/band/genre X, I know that it is better than any other I could choose to listen to. This idea adds to our confidence and self-worth by affirming that the things we like or choose to consume are actually indicators of our intelligence; I am intelligent enough to recognize the value of a certain piece of art and like it, while other people, who are less smart than I, do not recognize the worth of this art and do not like it. Indeed this idea conflates the concepts of 'taste' and 'intelligence' into one, assuming that each informs the other. My good taste is a product of my high intelligence.

This also affects how I interact and judge the people around me. Do I know if someone likes Soulja Boy? By following my 'high intelligence leads to good taste' formula I can prove that that person is likely stupider than someone who disdains the art of Soulja Boy.

Is this idea correct? No, it is based on the logical fallacy of assigning objective values of worth to subjective concepts. Is Im Yoona beautiful? To someone who thinks she is beautiful she is. Does Soulja Boy make terrible music? To someone who thinks his music is terrible it is.

Yeah I'm kinda rambling so I don't know how to finish this.

[cronodroid]

No, you're right in that you shouldn't objectively view an inherently subjective issue. Then again, what isn't subjective? The thing is, trends and attitudes defy the idea of subjectivity. Why do so many people think Yoona is attractive? Why do so many people think Soulja Boy is crap? The opinions of the masses may not count for much when it's a commonly held attitude that popular opinion is stupid, but academically we almost always use mass opinion to determine various things.

As an example, I think that so many people find Yoona pretty is significant in and of itself, because there must be an underlying reason for it. Maybe she really is just a beautiful girl. Maybe Korean culture promotes the sort of looks she possess.

In the context of whether these rookies are making "bad" stuff, it may be unfair to call it "bad music" but certainly there is a precedent for labeling some songs as good and other songs as bad. If a song is extremely pleasurable to listen to as in you want to keep hearing it, lots of people keep listening to it and rave about it, it receives awards from major music critics and dominates sales, there is a reason for it. So in that sense, I think it's fine to critique new idols for creating music that the audience (whether Korean or foreign) don't enjoy listening to. It'll reflect in sales, if nothing else.

As far as stage performances go, it's much easier to measure. Vocal talent and the ability to follow the choreography is blatant.

Anyway, I'm glad to read your comments because you did bring up an important point, this is solely my opinion but I would like to see what others think too.

[iacus]

That idea is called "intersubjective," meaning a subjective judgement that a large number of people agree on. It doesn't quite have the agreement obliterating weight that the term "objective" does.
http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/2008/05/14/in-critical-condition/

Is vocal talent or ability to follow choreography blatant? What if I prefer to listen to someone who "can't sing" to someone who can?

[cronodroid]

That will rarely happen though because most people aren't tone deaf and a singer going off key or out of tune is instantly apparent to most listeners. You can also measure a singer's ability to hold a note, and their range quite easily.

Things like timbre are more subjective though, some singers are better liked than others because people enjoy the color of their voice more. Jessica definitely has better vocal control than Tiffany, but she has a bit of a sour tone whereas Tiffany has a richer, huskier voice although she makes vocal miscues more often.

[iacus]

Actually it happens all the time. Entire genres of music are dedicated to people singing "wrong."

And yes that's my point, most people don't stop in the middle of listening to a song in order to measure the singers range, and only then declare that they like the song. The majority of people like or dislike music pretty intuitively based on what makes them feel good, not based on what's good or not.

You can measure a artist's technique but you can't measure how it makes you feel.

[arbitrary_greay]

Entire genres of music are dedicated to people singing "wrong."

"With the exception of Milli Vanilli's, pop listeners have always been fairly indulgent about performers' ethics. It's hits that matter, and the average person listening to just one pop song on the radio will have a hard time hearing Auto-Tune's impact; it's effectively deceptive. But when track after track has perfect pitch, the songs are harder to differentiate from one another--which explains why pop is in a pretty serious lull at the moment. It also changes the way we hear unaffected voices. "The other day, someone was talking about how Aretha Franklin at the Inauguration was a bit pitchy," says Anderson. "I said, 'Of course! She was singing!' And that was a musician talking. People are getting used to hearing things dead on pitch, and it's changed their expectations."
Despite Randy Jackson's stock American Idol critique--"A little pitchy, dawg"--many beloved songs are actually off-pitch or out of tune. There's Ringo Starr on "With a Little Help from My Friends," of course, and just about every blues song slides into notes as opposed to hitting them dead on. Even Norah Jones, the poster girl of pure vocals, isn't perfect. "There's some wonderful imperfections of pitch on 'Don't Know Why' from Come Away with Me," says Anderson, "and most of the other tunes on the album as well. But I wouldn't want to change a single note."
Source

"[[About Annette Funicello]] Direct the attention of your concerned friends and relatives also to Annette’s voice. Ask them if they have heard anything quite like it. In all probability they will be forced to agree that it occupies a unique timbral space and fills a gap in the pantheon of pop vocal archetypes. Annette was far from confident about her vocal range, but developed a slightly hard-edged, almost nasal, half-talking style, that makes me think of the clacking of high heels, and is as distinct in its way, and as enriching to popular music, as the vocal styles of David Bowie, Joanna Newsom or Morrissey. In fact, you may be able to hear how it anticipates something of the brashness of Debbie Harry or Kim Gordon. Even in purely technical terms, Annette’s vocals represent something of a buried innovation. She was known for the “Annette Sound”. In an interview, Annette tells of how the Annette Sound came into being:
I was working with a wonderful arranger/conductor by the name of Tutti Camarata, who had done all the music for the studio, for the Vista label, and he was so kind to me… and he was just sympathetic and very supportive… In fact, he’s the one that came up with the idea of the “Annette Sound”. To get the Annette Sound I would sing the song through one time, or, you know, sing it many times until it was exactly right, then I’d put the earphones on, hear my own voice, and sing to it, as exact as I could possibly get it. So it gave me that larger sound that I needed, because my voice is very small, and a range of about three notes. So, it just - it worked, I mean, it really worked, because a lot of other artists went to that technique.
I wonder how many recording artists using the technique today realise that Annette Funicello was the first to employ it. I wonder, also, how many people know that John Lennon confessed to taking up the technique for The Beatles specifically after listening to Annette."
Source

[arbitrary_greay]

Is the ability to follow choreography blatant?
Two waves in the gif linked. The blog author prefers the girl on the right for its greater emphasis and power, but a lot of people(myself included) prefer the more sensual wave on the left. Yet the girl on the right learned to dance that way because when her mother went to see her at a concert she couldn't identify her daughter, so the girl now makes grander movements in order to stand out in a dancing crowd. Wouldn't that be frowned upon in Kpop, because it would break the sync of the group? Tommy Rall has better technique but Bob Fosse choreographed his own part, who's the better dancer? Fred Astaire or Gene Kelly?

And of course my own personal pet peeve, Hyuna winning that best dancer poll a while back with Hyo not even being one of the other choices. That's my beef with intersubjective.

But yet I still largely rely on reviews to pick films or restaurants I have no previous knowledge about. Obviously I do rely on intersubjective somewhat. Speaking of which just today after seeing several posts about Chi Chi on a forum I lurk on I watched the link. Shit, the whole package from the song to the dance to the fucking flouncy skirts is super catchy. XD I think I might follow the Krystal look-alikethem. Shame about the outfits and simple dance, but it's not that different from the likes of this, except Don't Play Around is even more ear-wormy, ugh. You know, I think it's this exactly same sequence of events(seeing several posts about its catchiness on that forum) that led me to watch the Gee MV for the first time way back when.

I think it's fine to critique new idols for creating music that the audience (whether Korean or foreign) don't enjoy listening to.
Yes, there is this very important distinction to make. A somewhat objective prediction of whether or not a song or group will sell well is quite a different thing from trying to assign some value of "quality" to it. Saying a) how I personally judge something vs. b) how I think X demographic will react to something vs. c) declaring the quality of something are very different cases. Take this thread for example. Your OP's main point seemed to be b) with predicting how the Korean music market would take the rapid debuting of new groups, and you and I have had a) in our comments with our personal preferences in idol looks, but the OP also put up some of c) with assuming musical freedom and the YG system to be beneficial and that these new groups are inferior. Those latter declarations are really what raised my hackles, although I can't speak for the others who have commented in here. Through your replies in the comments you've been able to flesh out these declarations into arguments with with what perspective you've based them on. But a lot of them still come off slightly like trying to label something good or bad with an universal standard("objective") rather than having a clear external standard such as the Korean aesthetic or international appeal(intersubjective) to contextualize with.