So, will Angela Zhang really get greasy with age, or will he gradually lose his dominant position on the stage? This may come from the word greasy itself.
With many middle-aged male stars being labeled as "greasy", these two words have gradually become popular words in the circle. We say this to actors who can play the role of tenderness because we hate this uncomfortable feeling.
But this doesn't mean that we can use "greasy" to describe people or performances we don't like.
Take Wang Xiaoshuai's comments as an example. He thinks that Angela Zhang's stage performance reminds him of the dancers in old Shanghai, and it is wrong to describe his feelings as greasy.
In my opinion, Wang Xiaoshuai's comments are just criticism for the sake of criticism. I learned a "greasy" thing in those days, but now I have learned it and sold it. Is it really not greasy to sing in the toilet with a guitar?
As a form of artistic expression, different people will naturally have different impressions. Take Angela Zhang's adaptation of Love in My Heart as an example. If we have listened to the original song, we will find that Angela Zhang's adaptation did not deliberately deepen the affection in the original song, but deliberately described the artistic conception with an atmosphere of "reliving love".
The so-called greasy, but refers to a feeling or feeling so strong that people are uncomfortable, rather than an objective standard. People who often say "greasy" often just label others. If you ask them to give something "not greasy", you will often be speechless.
In my opinion, judging whether Angela Zhang's song performance is greasy depends on whether the audience likes the adapted version. From various comments, it is not difficult to see that Angela Zhang's change has not only been recognized by people in the industry, but also made the audience feel different versions of love.
Wang Xiaoshuai's evaluation not only symbolizes his attitude, but also symbolizes the program effect.
The variety show Songzan is very interesting. Instead of asking authoritative predecessors to be judges, hundreds of short video platforms are invited to play the role of judges, which is equivalent to letting a group of amateurs evaluate whether a group of singers sing well or not.
While the influence of short video platforms has soared, it is also easy to gain popularity. Wang Xiaoshuai can sing in the toilet and win millions of fans. Does a million fans show that he has the strength?
Wang Xiaoshuai seems to criticize for the sake of criticism, whether to show his right as a judge or to satisfy the pleasure brought by the comment star. I think there are some, but it does not rule out that this is a kind of program effect that can be created.
The variety show "Songzan" was a rush to do things from the beginning. Angela Zhang is not the only singer facing this kind of evaluation. Tang Hanxiao, who composed explosive songs such as Nobody, also won the title of "Ordinary Performance".
Can a group of amateur listeners really judge the performance of professional singers?
It is no exaggeration to say that "ode" is "non-mainstream". This variety show almost completely abandons the professionalism of the judges and simply starts with the spread of songs: no matter how professional your songs are, it is not good for the audience not to like them.
In order to make hundreds of judges have the right to represent the audience, short video bloggers have been invited in almost every field, except for hillbillies like Rainbow Xiaoshuai and Mesnier, who form a group opposite to professional singers, but they are actually an important channel for the spread of songs.
The judges directly gave the right to be popular, which was a return that all previous variety shows could not guarantee.
According to the rules of the program, the songs of the winners in the program will be promoted by the judges present. In today's era when short videos are king, the influence of these judges can directly help a song move from silence to fame. This case has been verified more than once.
As Cui Jian said in the variety show, the Internet has become a way of communication that has to be faced. Singers' new songs need to be spread through the internet, and performances also need to be served through the internet, not to mention other aspects. It can be said that as long as a singer wants to fill his stomach, he must face a stage like Ode to Virtue.
In my opinion, Song Zan is a groundbreaking variety show. If "Earth Examination Conference" only uses the deconstruction of public figures to stir the audience's nerves, "Sing it" directly pulls down the last scene between singers and ordinary people.
They all live on the Internet. What do you want to install?
Who can know you without traffic support? Don't be so secretive.
Rhetoric is exaggerated, but it is the theme of The Book of Songs. The program takes naked traffic as a temptation to let all singers leave the protection of "technical terms", thus forcing singers to adapt or create songs that the public likes.
Objectively speaking, the original intention of the program is very good, and this variety show is really needed in China. As Ninetowns said in an interview on the show, fans are often only praised, which means it is difficult to find their own shortcomings without accepting criticism.
In recent years, there have been more and more music variety shows, and the songs sung by singers have made the audience more and more confused. Either so-called self-singing songs mixed in Chinese and English, or singers howl on the stage in the name of "ghosts". The popularity of songs declined sharply, and Jay Chou's single was once again favored by the audience. We haven't seen a song that can be called a classic for a long time.
The root of this phenomenon lies in the occupational barriers that can be created. Some singers are obviously not from the national team, but they have to argue every day that arrangement is more important than lyrics. The rest of the jury spoke against their will because of their feelings, so the audience didn't understand the music, but they didn't really understand it.
The audience is just curious, how can this song be praised by "experts" because it is so ugly?
Singing is a variety show that came into being at the historic moment. It tries to show what a pop music should look like from the perspective of the audience and non-professional musicians, which can be seen from the program competition system.
Each singer's adapted or newly created song needs to be given a clip, and the judges will make a preliminary score according to this clip, and then make a second round score according to the actual stage performance. Finally, several influential bloggers will directly determine the success or failure of the work, and the characteristics of traffic first will be fully demonstrated.
There is no need to deliberately create traffic for the program. The contradiction between professionals and non-professionals will naturally promote the development of the program. Professionals can't be right, but the judges don't mean they can make an objective and accurate evaluation. For example, when commenting on Angela Zhang's performance, Rainbow only expressed his ideas from his own perspective, but this idea was not accepted by most audiences. After all, the strength of the winner of the Golden Melody Award cannot be faked.
Without the pursuit of fans and the love of peers, every player needs to face the evaluation of hundreds of judges no matter what achievements he has made before the game. In order to achieve the effect of "public comments", the program specially arranged two screens on the spot, on which singers can see comments in real time.
These professional singers have to face a problem. What if their songs are not accepted by the public for the time being? The answer is simple: don't write songs that the audience doesn't like.
The aura of professional singers has been torn by the program, and the status of singers and audiences is equal. So we see that there are often mutual plots in the program. Some singers will directly ask the soul, "Can you understand love songs?"
This problem is very important, because the identity characteristics of bloggers gradually deviate from the original intention of the program in the actual evaluation process.
Third, traffic is not a private product.
These bloggers can be invited to be judges because of their traffic, which is also their bargaining chip for commenting on singers who used to be above.
In this abnormal peer-to-peer relationship, the judges' comments are more based on their own traffic than on the intuitive feelings of music as a member of the public.
We can see that when judges comment on a bad song, they often use "I won't use it in my own video" to express their disapproval. But they don't understand that from their own traffic and network influence, they are only qualified for icing on the cake, not negative.
Traffic is not a private product, they can only influence, but not change the direction of traffic.
Just like taking Jay Chou as an endorsement, his Yosemite milk tea advertisement can make the audience feel that the quality of Yosemite is really good, but will some people think that the fragrant milk tea is not good?
This is the irrationality of Ode, which gives the traffic owners the right to "kill", but forgets to remind them that they need to stand in the position of the public for trial.
Perhaps it is because Songzan is a creative variety show, and its specific expression is biased, which makes the audience look like two groups are finding fault with each other and lose the positioning that the program itself should meet.
However, I think these judges should also make their positions clear. Even from the perspective of traffic propagation, don't forget that traffic is not a private product, nor is it your bargaining chip. Don't ignore the real voice of the public in order to show off the saints in front of people. Isn't this kind of traffic owner a star of different shapes?
The traffic on the topic of traffic is collected by individual network users, which may represent the love of some netizens for a paragraph or a cover song before participating in the program. However, when traffic owners enter the variety show, they should be careful about the demise of their own traffic. If they can't express their willingness to conform to traffic aggregation, they are doomed to be abandoned by traffic.
Traffic never belongs to anyone, and an online celebrity may be squeezed dry by various gimmicks, but while traffic brings benefits, it will also become a shackle that binds the behavior of traffic subjects.
If these problems only belong to the basic attributes of the program, then "professionalism" must be what we need to face. Although there is no authoritative judge in the program, one judge seems to have automatically brought himself into an authoritative position, criticizing the performance of professional singers with a "superior" eye.
As we all know, "professional people do professional things", and hundreds of judges can express their feelings and opinions according to the performance of singers, but it needs to be remembered that you should never criticize singers on the stage from a professional perspective, which is not their professional field. Talking about material things will only attract people's ridicule.
Generally speaking, the variety show Songzan is still very valuable. Perhaps it is a practical factor that the plan failed to show all its glory. However, from the current situation, it is not difficult for us to have a strong interest in the program. This is the first time that we have been in such close contact with a star and a singer, and it is also the first time that we have enjoyed the sense of accomplishment belonging to the traffic creator.
This should be the case in the market. As the creators of traffic, we should have some control while taking risks, instead of being treated as leeks in the field.
However, under the impact of novelty, we can't fall into blind impulse and lose our rationality in order to satisfy the desire to criticize stars. Otherwise, this right will only be short-lived and will be criticized.