Is being good looking necessary in the music industry?
>>72037655
Name one bald manlet that became a star
>>72037692
Moby
>>72037692
>>72037692
Jerry Franklin
>>72037727
>Had long hair and wore a hat and stood behind a keyboard when he was a popstar
>Had to go behind the scenes when he became legitimately bald
>>72037726
holy shit I thought he was like 6"1'
But still, nobody listens to techno
>>72037731
literally who
>>72037655
It depends on time and place, and exactly what is meant by "the music industry".
In general, no. The whole point of music is that you listen to it, and don't look at it. Also "the music industry" can easily be construed to encompass classical music, independent artists, and so on, many of whom are (and historically have been) quite ugly. Ringo Starr and Tiny Tim come to mind. Watch a youtube video of an orchestra performing a famous classical piece, and see how many stringy men with stringy hair you see, and old crone women. Even Susan Boyle has recently enjoyed success due to the frog-princess vehicle of modern pop-maker shows.
Still, it's fairly obvious to most of us that the OP really means the contempoarry, "traditional" mass market apparatus. This platform conflates attractiveness, sex, money, visual, and pop music-pretty much everything satanic. So it's necessary to at least get people with all-right faces and decent builds/facial symmetry to populate this industry. Susan Boyle can sing standards and jazz records and that type of thing, but she will never be a "pop star", meaning also sex symbol, for example.
The visualization of the pop star in the mid-20th century required that the pop star also become a sex symbol. Even ugly men can become sex symbols in this way, exactly because bodily aesthetics in men are not so mission-critical to their personal sexual market value. Not so women. The women have to be looking baseline-good or else the "be a sex symbol via being a pop star" is a total non-starter. Witness the kpop industry, for example.
>>72037692
I can name two: MC Ride and The Edge
>>72037692
Angry Anderson
>>72037655
Not entirely. There's been plenty of ugly artists in all genre's
>>72037655
No
>>72037655
>The whole point of music is that you listen to it, and don't look at it
I don't think so, anon. A lotta of artists have people behind them that groom the artists from what they should say during interviews, what they wear and how their music videos should look. Of course in the indie scene it's different but with this age I think how you look is all apart of your image and the music.
You can either be good looking or ugly.
Good looking because it's obvious, and ugly because then being ugly yet still cool and popular can be your thing.
Being plain is the worst.
>>72038107
It's also easier to look good when you're rich
used to not be necessary
the music video ruined that though
yeah
>>72037692
Grimes
>>72037692
>>72037692
Phife (RIP)
>>72038076
why do his eyes look like that?
>>72038336
This (1,68 m.)
>>72038336
Epic beard genetics though
>>72038368
He has a wonkey eye
>>72037692
>posts georgebaseball.jpg
>>72038076
he looks like a ballsack
>>72037692
tupac lol
>>72037692
devin townsend
>>72039019
Who would've known that the band Hammond hates the most was his own?
>>72037655
if you're gonna be a pop idol or in a boy band or something like that, being fat is probably not an option. but other than that, i think nothing is of limits nowadays.
>>72037655
Yes because music is more about boosting your ego and getting laid nowadays than it is about the actual music
You either:
>Invent an innovative style
>Produce pleb music
Statistically proven to be the most effective, unless you sing hella' good, which isn't very common
>>72037655
for women, generally yes, especially for pop
for men, no but it helps
>>72037692
Elton John
>>72038132
>Being plain is the worst.
>Lizzy Grant