the real talent of an artist can only be assessed after the artists death because then their fame will not interfere in the assessment.
Music has been an integral part of our lives since decades and has either solaced us at every poignant time or has created convivial atmosphere at time of heyday. Some people say, talent of an artist, specifically musician, can't be evaluated until the musician has perished. These people assert that fame often interfere while discerning. In my opinion, the above argument is accurate, as i have explained by delineating two instances.
Firstly, evenhanded evaluation of talent has multiple criteria in itself some of which remain unaffected whether the musician is at apogee or not. For instance - If we are judging a musician's talent on the basis of his voice quality, tone, and pitch etc., it is unlikely that the person adjudicating several musician talents, based on this criteria, will look whether that artist is famous or not. It would be more of the test of quality of voice as it is behind the stage, if we say so. Moreover, this assessment is not limited to voice quality as there are certain software that check whether the music used in the background is original or an amalgam of already existing resources. When such criteria come into picture the fame and glory are relegated, which makes this kind of assessment independent of being affected by any outside factor - like fame, and thus making it free .
Secondly, a prevalent trend that judges talent not just on the basis of vocal qualities, but also on the degree up to which musician can make the audience enthralled - while performing - has become a new norm. Here, the main focus is placed upon the overall performance and the mood that an artist creates as he sings at an event. Proponents who assess a talent in this way assert that it is equally important for an artist to make audience spellbound with the performance being delivered and therefore judging only on the basis of vocal quality doesn't encompasses overall report. these overall reports can only be created by capturing the emotions of audience, it becomes intrinsic requirement for an artist to be alive for such evaluations.
On the other hand, above two assessment always elicit a bias when fans can mess up the authentic evaluations by being too much effusive just by seeing the artist that even when artist is switching between the scene or drinking water they scream and galvanise the surrounding as if something godly is occurring. When an evaluator judges the artist's talent from these venue the result become apocryphal. Additionally, an evaluator can themselves be fan, and when such situation arises it becomes way too hard to discern the result has been developed leaving the biases aside or their has been some.
As we can see from above three arguments, taking a side makes us leave some important aspects that are being covered in the other side therefore it is difficult and intricate issue to properly choose side upon, and there will always be some factors that will look valid on either of the sides.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 225, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...nt of an artist, specifically musician, cant be evaluated until the musician has per...
^^^^
Line 3, column 183, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'musicians'' or 'musician's'?
Suggestion: musicians'; musician's
...not. For instance - If we are judging a musicians talent on the basis of his voice qualit...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 336, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...ting several musician talents, based on this criteria, will look whether that artist...
^^^^
Line 3, column 768, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ame and glory are relegated, which makes this kind of assessment independent of b...
^^
Line 3, column 882, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...tor - like fame, and thus making it free . Secondly, a prevalent trend that ju...
^^
Line 3, column 883, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...or - like fame, and thus making it free . Secondly, a prevalent trend that jud...
^^
Line 5, column 221, Rule ID: MAIN_FOCUS[1]
Message: Use simply 'focus'.
Suggestion: focus
...ming - has become a new norm. Here, the main focus is placed upon the overall performance ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 547, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...ging only on the basis of vocal quality doesnt encompasses overall report. these overa...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 582, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: These
...lity doesnt encompasses overall report. these overall reports can only be created by ...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 312, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “When” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ing as if something godly is occurring. When an evaluator judges the artists talent ...
^^^^
Line 7, column 341, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'artists'' or 'artist's'?
Suggestion: artists'; artist's
...occurring. When an evaluator judges the artists talent from these venue the result beco...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 361, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this venue' or 'these venues'?
Suggestion: this venue; these venues
...valuator judges the artists talent from these venue the result become apocryphal. Additiona...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, look, moreover, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, while, for instance, kind of, in my opinion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 29.0 19.5258426966 149% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.4196629213 72% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 14.8657303371 114% => OK
Relative clauses : 19.0 11.3162921348 168% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 33.0505617978 118% => OK
Preposition: 60.0 58.6224719101 102% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 12.9106741573 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2463.0 2235.4752809 110% => OK
No of words: 501.0 442.535393258 113% => OK
Chars per words: 4.91616766467 5.05705443957 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.73107062784 4.55969084622 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60790277207 2.79657885939 93% => OK
Unique words: 264.0 215.323595506 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.526946107784 0.4932671777 107% => OK
syllable_count: 802.8 704.065955056 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 20.2370786517 84% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 29.0 23.0359550562 126% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 71.7169561492 60.3974514979 119% => OK
Chars per sentence: 144.882352941 118.986275619 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.4705882353 23.4991977007 125% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.05882352941 5.21951772744 174% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 12.0 7.80617977528 154% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.2758426966 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.31129486738 0.243740707755 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0956081605488 0.0831039109588 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0568007032935 0.0758088955206 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.159898497858 0.150359130593 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0540362990571 0.0667264976115 81% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.5 14.1392134831 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.04 48.8420337079 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 12.1743820225 120% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.85 12.1639044944 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.83 8.38706741573 105% => OK
difficult_words: 119.0 100.480337079 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 11.2143820225 121% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.