I haven't watched AI this year, so I don't know the voices. However, as I was flipping thru channels looking for something else I briefly saw this Phillip fellow doing a 60s number. The voice was painful.
I was glad to read Adam comment about it being a singing competition. If anyone has the expertise to comment on singing, it's Adam. I'm tired of everyone (even Adam in the past) always saying, "They all have great voices." No, they don't.
I don't see anything mean or even harsh about "wipe the floor". He was commenting on the voices only, not on the total performer or the person. It irritates me that it seems our country has become so concerned with enhancing self-esteem and
protecting the feelings of others that we don't give honest feedback. Not only does it give some a false sense of the quality of their work, but, it fails to acknowledge those who truly excel in what they are doing. We end up with a bunch of mediocrity.
Perhaps I am sensitive about it today because I am doing grading for my college class. In order to document that I am being fair, and to inform the students exactly how they will be assessed, I have had to develop templates that do a breakdown of the tasks or points of the assignment. "One point for every reference given, up to a maximum of five
points" for example. "One point off for every error in spelling or grammar." I am being forced to reduce my judgment to a quantifiable formula instead of looking at quality.
Yes, student A included all the talking points required for their essay. Yes, she wrote in grammatically correct English. So, using my rubric, she gets the maximum points, even though her essay was pedantic and ordinary. Student B wrote an essay that was insightful, looked at things with a new twist, brought new ideas to the table and conveyed
her ideas clearly and cleverly. Using the rubric, she gets the same number of points as student A. If she makes two typos, she gets LESS points. Even tho' her essay was brilliant.
Problem is, I cannot quantify "brilliant," or "insightful" or "clever." So I cannot assign it points. So I cannot recognize the superior work
of one student over the others. (But, hey, I will have my rubric to validate the assigned grade should a student file a grade appeal.)
How do we quantify what makes a great voice? "I know it when I hear it," or "It gives me goosebumps" doesn't cut it. "He makes me want to listen to music again," is not a valid measure unless you can provide statistics on how many minutes per day you used to listen vs. how many minutes you listen to music since discovering Adam. So, listeners argue and nit pick about a singer's ultimate range: "She can sing five octaves", "He hits the high B." Ignoring Adam's question, "But, does it sound good?"
I always make at least 50% of my rubric about insight and providing original perspective, lol.
Those are things about Adam that I really like as well.
Maybe we can determine that a student knows the dates of major civil rights legislation. But that tells us nothing about what the student understands about the issues involved in civil rights or the impact of the legislation. In the same way, maybe we can quantify singing by the size of a singer's range and the number of seconds he can hold a note before running out of breath. But, that tells us nothing about the quality of the voice, the sensitivity, and the artistry of the singer.
Adam comes out and speaks the truth as he hears it. "@jsanchezai11 is a STAR. @jledetai11 sangs fo the blood. They wipe the floor with the other two. Its a SINGING competition. #keepinitreal" Not a comment that can be substantiated by having each contestant clean Adam's kitchen floor. And probably not "politically correct" or self-esteem building. But, I found it refreshing.
Oops, I better stop my rant and go back to grading. Sorry 'bout that.
But you know what? Jimmy has said worse at times. And when Randy is being mean, he has been worse "just keepin it real" < Randy quote
Adam Lambert praise them. (a few have not).