The real talent of a popular musician cannot accurately be assessed until the musician has been dead for several generations, so that his or her fame does not interfere with honest assessment.
Music- one of the elements that brings greater joy to life. Music is something that can be a partner you in your cheerful times, uplift you in your sad hours and even just keeps you accompanied whenever you feel like it. Musicians are people creating these beautiful melodies to keep us enamored. The prompt suggests that the real popularity cannot be tested unless the musician is dead for quite a long time and their "not being there" can infer to an unbiased judgement. To my opinion, this is not the case in most times. Either alive or dead, a person who can really connect to people will likely to have about the same level of appreciation.
To begin, creative tasks such as writing or making music or painting- these things require a certain ability of a person. Obviously, no one is equally creative. There is difference in the levels of creativity that people can achieve. Now, the people those have higher grasp on these subject-matters are likely to be higher than the mediocre people- in respect to innovation in the artistic fields. So, when we are talking about some musician or painter, it is an inherent assumption that the person is more talented than most people in this area. And talents are always appreciated whether the person is alive or dead, that too with other factors aside. For instance, Elvis Prisley- the king of pop music, had a real talent in creating some of the most iconoic songs in history. Now, although he might have some issues regarding his personal life, people loved him anyway. He reached the peak of his career very early and he truly was the king based on how people reacted to his music, even to this day. So, this illustrates that if people, to be specific, musicians, they have real talents and can touch the peoples' heart, people will bestow them with unbiased love.
Moreover, It is not the case that, a musician needs to produce constant hits to make himself a memorable person in the eye of people. There just needs to be something that can reach the people, even if it is just one song. For example, Michael Jackson produced numerous hits in his life time, making us all dance to the grooves. He created a sound completely of his own and people went crazy over him. Iconic singer Prince can be named. We can name Beatles. These are the bands or people, they have given us quality hits over the years. But when bands or singers like Blue or Daniel Powter comes up, it is usually for "that one song" they made. They have other works, sure, but that one song that made people realize how good they are, will always come on top whenever we mention their names. For instance, the first google search on their names provides the name of the work they are most notorious for. So, do people not care about them? They sure do and they are not dead yet.
Of course, people will say, in recent times, popularity is based on exposure. The more "views" someone has, the more popular she is. Is it not just proving the point here? If there were no real music or talent involved, people will not have appreciated them. Like in the case of many musicians, they were celebrated in their lifetime and they are still in the hearts of people. This has very little to do with them being gone and people being sad and sympathetic by this fact. Real talent is always appreciated.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 1110, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'peoples'' or 'people's'?
Suggestion: peoples'; people's
...hey have real talents and can touch the peoples heart, people will bestow them with unb...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 283, Rule ID: LIFE_TIME[1]
Message: Did you mean 'lifetime'?
Suggestion: lifetime
...l Jackson produced numerous hits in his life time, making us all dance to the grooves. He...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
anyway, but, first, if, moreover, really, regarding, so, still, for example, for instance, of course, such as, talking about
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 36.0 19.6327345309 183% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.9520958084 116% => OK
Conjunction : 22.0 11.1786427146 197% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 73.0 28.8173652695 253% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 64.0 55.5748502994 115% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 16.3942115768 49% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2757.0 2260.96107784 122% => OK
No of words: 595.0 441.139720559 135% => OK
Chars per words: 4.63361344538 5.12650576532 90% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.93888872473 4.56307096286 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.3500306128 2.78398813304 84% => OK
Unique words: 293.0 204.123752495 144% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.49243697479 0.468620217663 105% => OK
syllable_count: 868.5 705.55239521 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 18.0 4.96107784431 363% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 35.0 19.7664670659 177% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 43.5363699705 57.8364921388 75% => OK
Chars per sentence: 78.7714285714 119.503703932 66% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.0 23.324526521 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.54285714286 5.70786347227 62% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 23.0 8.20758483034 280% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.163426679957 0.218282227539 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0423295126634 0.0743258471296 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.044260337367 0.0701772020484 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.11164892016 0.128457276422 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0213210676667 0.0628817314937 34% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 8.9 14.3799401198 62% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 48.3550499002 130% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 12.197005988 71% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.28 12.5979740519 74% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.64 8.32208582834 92% => OK
difficult_words: 119.0 98.500998004 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.