In the classical and jazz realms, it is a good tool for presenters to sell an ensemble to their subscribers.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Are the Grammys still relevant?
- Thread starter Hambone70
- Start date
No, unless you have 'record deal' and a 'hot download' at the moment.
I'm quite disappointed that none to the 'Grammy Red Carpet' shows panned the camera to where the invitees were going thru metal detectors. Wonder if they had a 'check your gun' booth. . . . . .
I'm quite disappointed that none to the 'Grammy Red Carpet' shows panned the camera to where the invitees were going thru metal detectors. Wonder if they had a 'check your gun' booth. . . . . .
TB loved the grammys when Esperanza won
- Dec 21, 2007
- 15,222
- 45,014
- Disclosures
- Lark in the Morning Instructional Videos; Audix Microphones
The Grammys have NEVER been relevant.
Look at the awards through the '70's. Never and award for Led Zeppelin, the Who, etc etc etc.
Irrelevant then. Irrelevant now.
Except when Experanza Spaulding won "Best New Jazz Artist" (or whatever specifically they call it. That was a touch of relevance.
Look at the awards through the '70's. Never and award for Led Zeppelin, the Who, etc etc etc.
Irrelevant then. Irrelevant now.
Except when Experanza Spaulding won "Best New Jazz Artist" (or whatever specifically they call it. That was a touch of relevance.
Earlier this evening, I was browsing NPR's web site, and saw the headline, "2019 Grammy Awards: The Full List Of Winners".
However, at first glance I mis-read this as: "2019 Grammy Awards: The Full List Of Wankers".
However, at first glance I mis-read this as: "2019 Grammy Awards: The Full List Of Wankers".
The What???
Seriously - this has always been about record/music distribution companies patting themselves on the back for success in pandering to a lowest common denominator. I've always enjoyed it when artists I dig - or friends - land something, but except for some of the esoteric areas (music journalism?), the awards generally track sales prowess...probably about the most interesting thing about them, at this point, is the clash among various styles and tribes when it comes to cross-genre awards...Once an example of a new genre cops best album, best artist, etc., you can bet that the next new thing, ready to consume from underneath, is well on its way.
Seriously - this has always been about record/music distribution companies patting themselves on the back for success in pandering to a lowest common denominator. I've always enjoyed it when artists I dig - or friends - land something, but except for some of the esoteric areas (music journalism?), the awards generally track sales prowess...probably about the most interesting thing about them, at this point, is the clash among various styles and tribes when it comes to cross-genre awards...Once an example of a new genre cops best album, best artist, etc., you can bet that the next new thing, ready to consume from underneath, is well on its way.
Jaco needed only....sorry, I mean tort...ehmmm, I mean a Precision...I mean...carrots !
No, not relevant at all.
No, not relevant at all.
The Grammys, like most awards shows are just a shiny carrot to dangle infront of people. Not really relevant. While some of the performances were ehhh, I was impressed by H.E.R’s perferformance, and Brandi Carlisle....
NARAS in the other hand I think is relevant. They lobby for the rights of those who create music before congress and countless things behind the scenes to keep music alive in schools...
But yes. Most award shows are popularity contests.
NARAS in the other hand I think is relevant. They lobby for the rights of those who create music before congress and countless things behind the scenes to keep music alive in schools...
But yes. Most award shows are popularity contests.
I don't know, the 70's they had Stevie Wonder and Paul Simon winning, still relevant today.
H.E.R. pops a little bass in this one
Bonus Round, check out the excellent Tiny Desk session:
Kinda hard to discuss relevance year by year other than by album sales. Plenty here seem to be saying they aren't relevant, but, in the opinions of those who run them it's kinda hard to measure relevance by any other measure, that and streaming services. Sure, some acts will disappear next year, others will endure, and other acts won't sell enough albums to make the cut but will achieve some long-term relevance, many still won't even make that. To figure out who will achieve endurance is kinda hard - how do you operationalize that so as to even start measuring it, and better yet predict which act will endure. Year to year, though, sales seem to be a pretty solid indicator of what's relevant that year (whether or not it endures is a different thing), that and potentially the amount of writing there may be published about an act.
That being said, yeah, there's lots of that's really popular stuff that I hate, and I'm terrible at staying current in music - so why would I personally care about the grammys or anybody that's been on them? I mean, it's great for lady gaga who made yet another earworm, it's also great for anybody else that even got nominated. Furthermore, I really doubt anybody wanted to celebrate the life of Erik Peterson at the grammys the year he passed - he just didn't have the clout - but to say that his work hasn't had a profound effect on some people just because he never won an award for it would be just as incorrect as saying that Lady Gagas awards don't count for anything (or that she hasn't similarly inspired people) because people only buy the catchiest of music in droves.
As for whether or not the Grammys themselves are relevant, how much we're talking about it might make a yes. Its endurance can be discussed if we're talking about them three years from now.
That being said, yeah, there's lots of that's really popular stuff that I hate, and I'm terrible at staying current in music - so why would I personally care about the grammys or anybody that's been on them? I mean, it's great for lady gaga who made yet another earworm, it's also great for anybody else that even got nominated. Furthermore, I really doubt anybody wanted to celebrate the life of Erik Peterson at the grammys the year he passed - he just didn't have the clout - but to say that his work hasn't had a profound effect on some people just because he never won an award for it would be just as incorrect as saying that Lady Gagas awards don't count for anything (or that she hasn't similarly inspired people) because people only buy the catchiest of music in droves.
As for whether or not the Grammys themselves are relevant, how much we're talking about it might make a yes. Its endurance can be discussed if we're talking about them three years from now.
I have to admit, as a British guy, I've never got or followed them. I've just looked up the winners and I can't understand some of the categories and I haven't heard of 70% - 80% of the artists nominated.
What does the best record category mean when there is best album and best song too? And then what is best pop vocal album all about? I quite like Childish Gambino, but was This is America really the best song of the past year?
My favourite band of the past year or two has been Khruangbin, so I'd like to think I'm not adverse to new artists and not living in a hole :S
Having said that, we have the BRIT awards which I think is even more irrelevant!
What does the best record category mean when there is best album and best song too? And then what is best pop vocal album all about? I quite like Childish Gambino, but was This is America really the best song of the past year?
My favourite band of the past year or two has been Khruangbin, so I'd like to think I'm not adverse to new artists and not living in a hole :S
Having said that, we have the BRIT awards which I think is even more irrelevant!
Relevant? No. But I dont watch any TV. My wife said it was a joke.
I think we are entering a new era of hyperabundant entertainment options and folks aren't going to line up slavishly to watch superbowls and grammies.
Btw, if you did watch the Grammies, that's several hours of bass practice time you wont get back.
I think we are entering a new era of hyperabundant entertainment options and folks aren't going to line up slavishly to watch superbowls and grammies.
Btw, if you did watch the Grammies, that's several hours of bass practice time you wont get back.
