Music Thread #1 For 2/4/10: Kelly Clarkson's Telling Off Of Taylor Swift's Boss Breaks An Interesting Dilemma

Photo from E! online

Brought a fun smile to my face when I saw this:

On Thursday (February 4), "American Idol" season-one winner Kelly Clarkson, who has never been afraid to voice her opinion, took to her blog to fire back at Big Machine Records CEO Scott Borchetta recent defense of Taylor Swift's Grammy performance. Borchetta told The Associated Press, "This is not 'American Idol.' This is not a competition of getting up and seeing who can sing the highest note. This is about a true artist and writer and communicator. It's not about that technically perfect performance."

In response, Clarkson wrote on her blog: " Wow ..... Dear Scott Borchetta,

"I understand defending your artist obviously because I have done the same in the past for artists I like, including Taylor, so you might see why it's upsetting to read you attacking 'American Idol' for producing simply vocalists that hit 'the high notes.' Thank you for that 'Captain Obvious' sense of humor, because you know what? We not only hit the high notes, you forgot to mention we generally hit the 'right' notes as well. Every artist has a bad performance or two and that is understandable, but throwing blame will not make the situation at hand any better."

And the way she closed out the post is even funnier

The singer closed her letter with: "Sincerely, One of those contestants from 'American Idol' who only made it because of her high notes ;)."

Now let's actually analyzed this a little bit her.

Simply put, Swift has more writing and instrument playing talent than Clarkson while Clarkson is clearly a better singer (in fact, one of the best pure singers in music for sure).

But Clarkson has made herself a true all-star performer in music, establishing herself as quietly one of the most consistent selling artists over the last decade. The first American Idol winner has been more than just a "singer" thanks to her going the pop rock direction before her second album, standing out more for me than Carrie Underwood, even though soon to be Mrs. Mike Fisher is the only other Idol winning artist that is clearly a burgeoning presence in the industry now.

In fact, Sunday's Grammies exhibited again how questionable Swift is as a singer overall. She doesn't have the singing ability to win American Idol. But honesty, everyone should have known the obvious fact she has very limited range. And the whole music industry, especially nowadays, isn't based on who can just hit the highest notes so beautifully.

As always is the case in order to be a top selling singing artist, it's about who is able to appeal more. And if you have a tolerable voice amalgamated with an ability to write enough quality lyrics on addictive catchy beats, then you have won as a singing artists no matter the genre.

For that reality, Borchetta has a legitimate point about Simon Fuller's creation. American Idol winners aren't going directly to their first album with a whole bunch of tracks they have written or planned out. And with both Clarkson and Underwood, they still have or need songwriters for to provide them the words in order for them to hit those high notes.

In terms of pure economics, I rather have a multi-dimensional artist like Swift instead of a great singer but limited artist otherwise such as Clarkson nowadays. I rather have those artists who have the ability to save the label from spending money on multiple writers and having conflicts of ideas crash together, leading to an album being ruin without it even reaching off the ground.

Producers cost enough money nowadays, so dwindling the encumbrance any way you can on costs is paramount indeed. And really, I rather have those artists who can think for themselves from the get go, showing a potential to be a standout in my mind instead of just any high votes and that's it.

Provided, of course, that the multi-dimensional artist can carry a few notes.

And hey, if a person is both a great singer and a creative scribe, then headache solved.