Should The Voice raise the minimum age to compete and place restrictions on contestants?

[abigailcoasters]

I believe that kids shouldn't be competing. According to this website, the singing voice isn't fully developed until around ages 18 and 21. This is because the voice stabilizes since the vocal folds and larynx have reached full growth. The current minimum age is 13. Around that age (especially for boys), the voice starts to change due to hormones. With boys, the larynx and vocal folds grow larger, which causes the voice to become deeper. My choir director told me that she has seen some boys who were tenors as freshmen change to basses as juniors.  There are also some girls who are "late bloomers." My director told me that I was one of them as I noticed changes from ages 16-17 and again around age 18. I started to develop vibrato in my middle range around my 18th birthday.

 

A high school diploma or GED should also be required, and a college degree should be preferred. This would mean that the contestant would be finished with the required education and would not be missing too much class time (especially during Lives) to compete. Also, there should be a ban on contestants who have a degree in vocal performance, musical theater, choral music education, or other related fields or who made All-State choir within three years of their audition. These contestants would have received extensive vocal training and would be unfair to amateurs who only had training as a child in choir, theater, and/or private vocal lessons or who are self-taught. 

[Discovolcano]

No. Some kids and teens do the voice to get a head start in there carrier and America loves kids on the voice. And requiring a collage degree is total bull cause some of the adults didn’t even go to collage. 

[Cookie73]

No. I like the professionalism of the show and not allowing professionals on the show would make me stop watching

[erik g]

I just choose not to think into it that much lol

[Someone648]

I can't speak too much on the first one regarding development, but I really don't care whether or not the voice is fully developed or not. You find some diamonds in the rough with some contestants on the show that need the training from the show's vocal coaches and the panel. This benefits minors with more real technical/industry experience than they'd get in their high school choir, especially if they're not in a big music city like LA/NY/Nashville where I imagine you can easily find a good vocal coach. If they can't compete with their competition's vocals and sound underdeveloped, oh well. Some teens on the show outperform their adult counterparts every season. The only thing that holds me back on teens is the "cute" factor and Gwen screaming "MY BABY!" and the "YOU'RE 14???" comments, but that's all unrelated.

 

Regarding the diploma/GED.... no? As someone who's worked in the educational field and continues to work with teenagers, of course I'd love to see everyone achieve at least a basic GED, but it's by no means necessary for a singing competition. I support whatever compulsory education laws they need to meet with their state or whatever the producers need to legally comply with, but if the kid's willing to make the very questionable decision to go into music, why do they need a piece of paper that says "I completed x amount of math classes, x amount of science classes, and x amount of language arts." It's pointless.

 

And I said this on another thread but I don't need a talent show, I like The Voice because it's more like a show with talent. I've always seen it as:

Talent show with the prize of money and a show in Vegas --> AGT

Amateurs just wanting to get their name in the industry and a record contract ---> Idol

People who want more of an experience and exposure and increasingly seem to just reject the contract offer --->The Voice

I imagine The Voice is a much more interesting experience both as an artist and viewer and the bar needs to be a looooot higher. Barring "professionals" or those with previous experience is a strange suggestion. May the best (or I guess as we often see, most liked) contestant win.

[Daillon]

Like others have said, The Voice wouldn’t be The Voice without pros. It just wouldn’t work.

[TeamAudra]

This almost seems like a satire/trolling post, if I’m being honest. Wanting a minimum age is one thing, but that 2nd paragraph is something else. 

[RTV]

4 hours ago, Someone648 said:

I can't speak too much on the first one regarding development, but I really don't care whether or not the voice is fully developed or not. You find some diamonds in the rough with some contestants on the show that need the training from the show's vocal coaches and the panel. This benefits minors with more real technical/industry experience than they'd get in their high school choir, especially if they're not in a big music city like LA/NY/Nashville where I imagine you can easily find a good vocal coach. If they can't compete with their competition's vocals and sound underdeveloped, oh well. Some teens on the show outperform their adult counterparts every season. The only thing that holds me back on teens is the "cute" factor and Gwen screaming "MY BABY!" and the "YOU'RE 14???" comments, but that's all unrelated.

 

Regarding the diploma/GED.... no? As someone who's worked in the educational field and continues to work with teenagers, of course I'd love to see everyone achieve at least a basic GED, but it's by no means necessary for a singing competition. I support whatever compulsory education laws they need to meet with their state or whatever the producers need to legally comply with, but if the kid's willing to make the very questionable decision to go into music, why do they need a piece of paper that says "I completed x amount of math classes, x amount of science classes, and x amount of language arts." It's pointless.

 

And I said this on another thread but I don't need a talent show, I like The Voice because it's more like a show with talent. I've always seen it as:

Talent show with the prize of money and a show in Vegas --> AGT

Amateurs just wanting to get their name in the industry and a record contract ---> Idol

People who want more of an experience and exposure and increasingly seem to just reject the contract offer --->The Voice

I imagine The Voice is a much more interesting experience both as an artist and viewer and the bar needs to be a looooot higher. Barring "professionals" or those with previous experience is a strange suggestion. May the best (or I guess as we often see, most liked) contestant win.

I personally wish the US had The Voice Kids for minors. I think it would be more fair and more fun for them to compete with singers their own age.

 

I agree with you on the other points.

 

I watch AGT, American Idol, and The Voice. I like the variety of acts on AGT and seeing contestant growth on AI, but The Voice is my favorite of the three reality competitions. Having groups, experienced singers, and older contestants differentiates TV from AI. I don't have an issue with the level of experience or training any contestant in the 21 seasons has had, and I doubt truly famous singers would ever audition for the show.

[abigailcoasters]

21 hours ago, RTV said:

I personally wish the US had The Voice Kids for minors. I think it would be more fair and more fun for them to compete with singers their own age.

Agreed. There should be a separate kids' show and the age groupings should be separated as well (ie, a 10-year-old shouldn't be competing against a 16-year-old), such as Littles (ages 8-9), Pre-Teen (10-12), Junior Teen (ages 13-15), Senior Teen (ages 16-17), and Young Adult (ages 18-20), and main show should be 21+. Boys and girls should also be separated to create more fairness (this wouldn't be an issue in the younger age divisions, but in the older divisions, boys and girls have very different voices). It would be more fair and more fun for kids/young adults to compete against other singers their own age and gender.

[thevoicefan12]

this feels more like the vocal directors than the voice

[British Man]

19 hours ago, abigailcoasters said:

Agreed. There should be a separate kids' show and the age groupings should be separated as well (ie, a 10-year-old shouldn't be competing against a 16-year-old), such as Littles (ages 8-9), Pre-Teen (10-12), Junior Teen (ages 13-15), Senior Teen (ages 16-17), and Young Adult (ages 18-20), and main show should be 21+. Boys and girls should also be separated to create more fairness (this wouldn't be an issue in the younger age divisions, but in the older divisions, boys and girls have very different voices). It would be more fair and more fun for kids/young adults to compete against other singers their own age and gender.

 

So we have

 

The Voice Littles

The Voice Pre-Teen

The Voice Junior Teen

The Voice Senior Teen

The Voice Young Adult

The Voice Male

The Voice Female

[RTV]

19 hours ago, abigailcoasters said:

Agreed. There should be a separate kids' show and the age groupings should be separated as well (ie, a 10-year-old shouldn't be competing against a 16-year-old), such as Littles (ages 8-9), Pre-Teen (10-12), Junior Teen (ages 13-15), Senior Teen (ages 16-17), and Young Adult (ages 18-20), and main show should be 21+. Boys and girls should also be separated to create more fairness (this wouldn't be an issue in the younger age divisions, but in the older divisions, boys and girls have very different voices). It would be more fair and more fun for kids/young adults to compete against other singers their own age and gender.

That's either way too many individual shows or too complicated for casting, voting, etc. on a single series. Having The Voice Kids for everyone under age 18 and The Voice for those 18+ is a more feasible solution.

[Cookie73]

13 minutes ago, British Man said:

 

So we have

 

The Voice Littles

The Voice Pre-Teen

The Voice Junior Teen

The Voice Senior Teen

The Voice Young Adult

The Voice Male

The Voice Female

If The Voice executives did this, they would turn into TheFineBros

[RTV]

Yeah. It's not happening. I doubt they'll even make a separate show for minors.

[sneaky]

On 11/3/2021 at 5:13 PM, abigailcoasters said:

I believe that kids shouldn't be competing. According to this website, the singing voice isn't fully developed until around ages 18 and 21. This is because the voice stabilizes since the vocal folds and larynx have reached full growth. The current minimum age is 13. Around that age (especially for boys), the voice starts to change due to hormones. With boys, the larynx and vocal folds grow larger, which causes the voice to become deeper. My choir director told me that she has seen some boys who were tenors as freshmen change to basses as juniors.  There are also some girls who are "late bloomers." My director told me that I was one of them as I noticed changes from ages 16-17 and again around age 18. I started to develop vibrato in my middle range around my 18th birthday.

 

A high school diploma or GED should also be required, and a college degree should be preferred. This would mean that the contestant would be finished with the required education and would not be missing too much class time (especially during Lives) to compete. Also, there should be a ban on contestants who have a degree in vocal performance, musical theater, choral music education, or other related fields or who made All-State choir within three years of their audition. These contestants would have received extensive vocal training and would be unfair to amateurs who only had training as a child in choir, theater, and/or private vocal lessons or who are self-taught. 

Not that contestants really ever become  stars but I've always thought parents of child stars are betraying their kids childhood and leaving them out to dry so I've always thought it immoral.

 

I also kind of think contestants should be at least 16 or 17. Before then, they usually dont have much of an artistic vision and dont really have the life experience to pull off a song with any emotional complexity

[Anybody354]

I can understand that minors’s voices are still developing, but that is more an issue of starting singing when you are a child.

 

As for the education point, competing on The Voice while in high school is hard, so I can understand that point. However, requiring people to have a college degree seems off. Maybe you mean that people should not be attending college when they are on the show? Either way, if people want to compete on the show and they have school, they can always do the show and then do like summer school or something along those lines to catch up. Or they could try learning virtually.

 

Finally, divided up contestants into a bunch of different age groups and by sex and basing shows off of that would be too many shows.