Skip to comments.Are the Grammys Obsolete? (Awards have never really been hip, they're falling even further behind)
Posted on 02/12/2007 11:02:50 AM PST by weegee
Are the Grammys Obsolete?
The music awards have never really been hip, but they're falling even further behind
A lot of great music was released in the fourth quarter of 2006. But as usual, none of it is being considered for next Sunday's Grammy Awards.
As a comprehensive overview of the year that was in music, the Grammys always were a little slow to recognize the best music at the height of its relevance. The voters at the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences took a wait-and-see attitude toward artists such as the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, James Brown, Parliament-Funkadelic, Public Enemy and Nirvana and never really caught up.
The Grammys could get away with such oversights when they were the only music awards show. Now they're still the biggest, with a national TV audience in the millions. But their credibility and timeliness continue to erode. As the Internet accelerates the way music is distributed, consumed and evaluated, fans can turn to many credible and far more timely outlets to find the year's best songs and albums. Increasingly, the Grammys can't help but be perceived as a relic of a time when MP3 files didn't exist.
(Excerpt) Read more at chicagotribune.com ...
Yes they have become obsolete. They've become yet another platform for the leftists in America to spew their vile venom and profess their hatred for this country. the Grammy's have been going downhill ever since hip hop, rap, and similar genres have been included. Last night was they last time that show will be on in my house.
I've noticed that no one in the DBM has reported on the ratings last night's Grammy show got. Must have been pretty bad.
Were the Grammy's on last night? If so, I'll spend the rest of the minute mourning their passing. Amen.
The Grammys were more boring than usual last night.
Even the Chilli Peppers were boring.
And how old is that horrible Shakira song anyway??
Give Beck or the Kaiser Chiefs some recognition and maybe I'll be interested.
Even when I had TV I didn't watch them. Maybe one or two (and I'm 53).
The Simpson's have been dumping on them for years.
Rock and roll is about rebellion.
Just once, I'd like to see some band get nominated and tell the Grammy folks to go F themselves, they don't want some BS award.
Preferably on live TV.
You mean like when the Sex Pistols (the still living ones) refused to attend their Rock and Roll Hall of Fame induction and John Lydon, AKA Johnny Rotten, wrote a note explaining their disdain for the whole thing?
That's part of the problem. There are hardly any rock bands on that show anymore. In the words of Chad Smith (RHCP), "Get out there and start a rock band! We need more rock bands!"
The fact that they ignored Neko Case this year is just ridiculous.
The people who've been ignored by the Grammys and Oscars leave plenty of overlooked contemporaries in good company.
Same as it ever was.
And the Rolling Stoned Rock & Roll Hall of Fame is continuing that lousy tradition of celebrating the industry over the performers.
You're so right. I swear, it's almost criminal.
the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences took a wait-and-see attitude toward artists
and never really caught up.
No I dont think they get it at all. The Grammys have been irrelevant for many years.
Like - Best Pop Collaboration With Vocals - Tony Bennett & Stevie Wonder? I didnt know Stevie Wonder even put out a record last year or that Tony Bennett was still alive and how does this even qualify as pop?
How could John Mayer ever beat out Elvis Costello? And how does Mayer get to be a nominee for Best Male Pop Vocal Performance and Best Solo Rock Vocal Performance? Is he Pop or is he Rock? Well he must be both and therefore a Pop-Rock!
But then Dylan won for Best Solo Rock Vocal Performance over fellow tired oldster retreads Tom Petty and Neil Young when Beck should have won hands down.
Best Urban/Alternative Performance OK, I dont know about anybody else but arent Urban and Alternative very different from one another?
But Gnarls Barkley wins Best Alternative Music Album and Best Urban/Alternative Performance? He sounds a lot more R&B to me. Ben Harper is more a lot more rock or alternative than Barkley.
Shouldnt there be separate categories for Urban, Alternative, Adult Alternative and perhaps even Adult Urban Alternative? And since Rap isnt really music in any sense at all why is there even a category for that?
And so OK, I can understand that giving the Dixie Chicks some sort of award was the politically correct thing to do for that crowd, but Best Country Album should have gone to Little Big Town and they are a lot more Rock than John Mayer BTW.
Given the sorry lot of nominees for Record and Song of the Year, it should have gone to Put Your Records On by Corinne Bailey Rae
And The Raconteurs should have won something.
Well at least Polka In Paradise by Jimmy Sturr And His Orchestra won Best Polka Album (sarcasm).
And Shakira? shes a Latin, Columbian born, blonde haired yodeler who belly dances .Thats doesnt fit any category and probably shouldnt.
I'd say it's time to put the Gramma awards out to pasture. Does anybody still watch that tripe?
I didn't watch. It's all too much self- and industry- promotion, imho. And boring.
I have a very hip seventeen-year-old daughter who wouldn't be caught dead watching the Grammys...same as her nineteen-year-old brother. It has nothing to do with great bands, musicians, or great music anymore, it's just a circle jerk for the liberal/MSM/hype-list...
I agree with all of your excellent points.
I don't do top40 or country, so I tune into the Grammys knowing I'll probably fall asleep. But last nights show had such a crusty feel to it. And given Tipper Gores involvement with PMRC, I found it funny to see the "music industry" embracing Al.
And wasn't it the Grammys that gave Jethro Tull an award for best heavy metal band?? LOL
The grammys have ALWAYS sucked
Yep, picked them over METALLICA. I've not watch the Grammys since that fiasco.
OK, I'm coming in a bit late to this thread, but as a long time Rock n Rool fan, I've never watched nor cared for what the Grammy's say, it just doesn't interest me what sorts of 'awards' that these industry types fawn out to each other. I like what I like, simple as that.
That being said, I've got over 500 LP's of Rock records dating within the 60's, 70's, and some 80's, and made a bet with a co-worker (a Deadhead) that out of those 500 there is probably not ONE 'Grammy' winner within my record collection!
I lost that bet. Beatles "A Hard Days Night" and "Sgt Pepper" both won Grammys, as well as Simon & Garfunkel's "Bridge Over Troubled Water" ... OK, that makes 3 out of 500 albums that I own :)
Otherwise, where is "Boston"? A tremendously powerful and commercially successful album from 1975, and where is "The Wall"? Likewise for the Floyd, tremendously powerful and successful? And as a Tull fan, where is "Aqualung" or even "Thick As A Brick" in the Grammy scheme of things?
It really doesn't matter though, I like what I like, and who really gives two doinks what some televised 'awards show' says. It's all internal music industry politics anyway, so who cares?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.