Aviators is NOT a Bad Artist!

I do agree that it is important to consider what the artist wishes to do with their career, however I also feel the need to question his business sense or music sense if he refuses to elevate his talent to the next level. You say that he "has once made a song that has a unique style from usual." This suggests that he has only one unique song, while all of the others can be possibly be construed as identical or at least similar. This can be arguably because he is comfortable in his niche, but it can also easily be argued that this is because his music doesn't require extraordinary effort or skill. Truly talented musicians are always trying to push themselves to try different elements and concepts in their music. Most musicians are trying to push themselves in each album, not just in one EP. 4:4 bar phrasing is used very often, but it isn't true that it never gets old. Many other musicians have the capacity to create music using different phrasing bars, and I question his talent if he lacks the capacity to create music outside of a 4:4 format. Regarding the tempos and intros, your own selection of songs displayed a lack of variation in styles. His personal commitments have little to do with his music career. To argue that his personal life prevents him from having a professional life is a void argument, as all musicians are able to pursue personal and professional happiness, and all musicians find that balance. If he chooses to be only mildly successful in his professional career, then that is his prerogative, however, his personal pursuits do not justify his lack of success. Regarding your statement to "JUST LEAVE HIM ALONE," I would like to bring up the reality that I am debating you, and not attacking him. I have no strong feelings against Aviators, I simply do not think that he is a good artist. That is my musical opinion. You say that he played the violin for 8 years, before quitting because he thought it would get him nowhere, which shows that he lacked the skill to succeed with that instrument. Then you say that he learned about "music theory, reading it, blah blah blah like that." This is a poor way to frame your argument, as it is vague, adds nothing to your argument, and suggests a lack of musical seriousness. You also raise the point that he began recording music "the simple starter way (GarageBand DAW)." I would like to point out that anyone with a Mac could use GarageBand, and theoretically, any of these users could create the same level of music as Aviators has through the use of this software. If non-musicians can easily use this software to create equivalent music, then I once again am forced to question his level of talent. If he personally thought his music to be absolutely horrible as well, then I am forced to think that this work must have been bad. Finally, you have no authority to pass judgement on music that you have not heard. You can make an inference based on the reviews, but if you have not personally heard this music, then you have no personal say. You are 14, and do not suggest any technical musical instruction. You do say that you have vocal experience, although I can infer from your arguments that this is self instruction. Without any professional technical music instruction, I am forced to assume that you have no real authority to evaluate Aviators' musical technique or ability, so you cannot objectively judge him as good or bad. In a debate such as this, sources and experience are everything, and at the end of the day, your goal is to convince the voters. That being said, it's pointless to suggest that you are getting revenge in any way by debating me. We have never had any previous interaction, so your comments about winning and revenge are entirely unrelated. I would like to point out that you have just admitted that you are taking the info blindly. Timing is irrelevant. If you are taking your information blindly, then you logically have no support to back up your arguments. You suggested that his music was heartfelt, emotional and melancholy, then in Round 2, you suggested that the acoustic performance made these pieces heartfelt, emotional, and melancholy, meaning that the electric pieces were not so. "Now just because not all of them may be good," is the second time in this debate that you have acknowledged Aviators' music as not necessarily good. I will once again point out that this means that his music is arguably bad. You are again conceding the debate. He may not be intending to manipulate his audience, but I was explaining his psychological structure of the album. Regardless of his intent, this structure is conducive to the type of audience manipulation that I described. You once again say that popularity is no issue, and then try to suggest that Aviators has massive popularity. This is a faulty point and contradicts itself. In conclusion, my opponent displays frequent and massive faults in his 2nd and 3rd Round arguments. His tone throughout the debate is mocking and lacks substantial reasoning to support his claims regarding Aviators' value as a musician. I encourage any voters to do their own research, and hope that Pro and I have provided you with an entertaining debate at the very least.