| |
Music News: Steve Stoute shows his ass, embarrasses himself re: Grammys
Member Since: 10/10/2009
Posts: 10,662
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Ace Reject
But in the past ten years, there have been very few legitimately great pop albums (which is not to say that other genres don't make it into AoTY with utter crap).
In fact, I think the past two years show that NARAS is changing, by a wide margin.
|
That's something i agree with. Common ground lol. 
Excluding rap, there's also the fact that pop music for the past decade has been percieved as being inferior primarily due to the lack of artisitry of the musicians themselves. But I definately see the committee changing and i'll even predict that they'll take a giant step or two next year that will demonstrate that POP music will never be low brow 
|
|
|
|
ATRL Moderator
Member Since: 2/19/2003
Posts: 34,484
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Cap10Planet
Seriously, has rap or pop deserved to win that often? Put genre aside and look at the nominees and winners aka the competition. It's possible that better was rewarded. If not, chances are some other nominee was more deserving. It's not always about the genre. Rap or pop wins when it truly deserves to. Of course there are few exceptions... like "Lose Yourself" not taking one of the big awards years ago.
|
You know what offends me? That the true "crime" NARAS repeats is stacking the deck, i.e. nominating Gaga and Perry, throwing Need You Now/Clocks in the middle of four urban-hip/hop records. Of course, he couldn't say that because Lady Antebellum made the industry a lot of money last year.
And Esperanza Spaulding didn't. SMDH.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/1/2010
Posts: 65,177
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Ace Reject
And Esperanza Spaulding didn't. SMDH.
|
I'm really not feeling the backlash she's getting right now. 
Had Justin Bieber won, many people would have been questioning the Grammys' credibility. This proves that you cannot please everyone.
|
|
|
|
ATRL Senior Member
Member Since: 9/24/2001
Posts: 10,763
|
ITA with Bart and Pikayonce right above me on the retarded hate aimed at Esperanza and the stacking the deck.
And really, if Bieber won everyone would have reject Grammys in the future.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 12/11/2007
Posts: 6,782
|
Grammys suck frankly 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/23/2007
Posts: 6,845
|
Jsutin Bieber is very talented, just because he's overrated doesnt mean he's not talented. i'm not surprised with this article, quite agree on most part 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 9/6/2006
Posts: 15,696
|
Yasss at Cap10Planet serving out and spilling the true tea!!! 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 12/6/2010
Posts: 4,317
|
I think the Main Problem with the Grammys isn't with the actually winners but with the Songs/Albums they nominate.
The Blue Ribbon Panel as Ace pointed out purposely stack the deck. You can't expect people to be happy when the right songs/Albums Aren't nominated in the first place.
Yes Arcade Fire deserved to Win over the albums they were nominated with, but there were plenty more non-nominated Albums that were more deserving.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 7/10/2010
Posts: 208
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Cap10Planet
And rap will win when it's deserving. Outside of ROTY, I don't think rap should have won anywhere else. There were more deserving material and artists in AOTY, SOTY and BNA. I don't know why people think the Grammys owe rap artists anything, especially when they are the most rewarded artists. Gimme a break!
|
I agree when you say even if Eminem's Marshall Mathers LP was robbed by Steely Dylan, Recovery was not because it's not as good as his first ones (even if I like it I can see that SSLP, MMLP and The Eminem Show was better, 8 Mile OST too).
But I don't agree when you say :
" And rap will win when it's deserving. Outside of ROTY, I don't think rap should have won anywhere else."
hmm what ? Ready To Die, Illmatic, Reasonable Doubt, Marshall Mathers LP, Late Registration. I can think about great classics which could have won that easily.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/26/2010
Posts: 13,102
|
Sorry but he's saying, even though he said he wasnt, but he's saying that the grammy's should revolve around commercial success rather than around musical credibility.
Lady Gaga is the person who has been the exciting artist, not JB, and she walked away with plenty of grammys.
His system would mean that artists that don't make Kesha and Katy Perry like music, would be snubbed year and year out, and how is that fair just because you choose not to conform to the corrupt ways of the music industry.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/11/2011
Posts: 594
|
Bieber should have been BEYOND pleased with even getting a nom. His commercial and cultural impact was recognized so this writer is looking hella stupid right now.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 10/17/2010
Posts: 906
|
Steve needs to have MANY seats. he is responsible for commercializing artists like Jay-Z and Em and Bieber so of course he wants the Grammys to legitimize them. Anyone complaining about the Grammy's not recognizing urban or hip hop acts are very myopic. The years Bey and Alicia walk away with a gazillion Grammys are they not fair then? And while Bieber has the cultural impact (I use that term lightly since it's not his music having the effect but his celebrity) as someone said Gaga is exciting and breaking barriers. And so WHAT Justin plays instruments. I just had to laugh at that part. As if that means playing instruments should guarantee him a Grammy. Ugh. This article pissed me off.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 2/17/2010
Posts: 21,811
|
Need You Now won both RoTY & SoTY. 
A nobody won Best New Artist. (Don't tell me Florence didn't deserve it.)
|
|
|
|
ATRL Moderator
Member Since: 2/19/2003
Posts: 34,484
|
Deemy, when Rude Boy and PINTER are the only two posters who co-sign with Stoute's point of view, you should know that no "dragging" occured. 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 9/25/2001
Posts: 26,816
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Violet Skye
The Grammys are getting more and more commercial... 10 years ago Lady Gaga, Rihanna, and Taylor Swift would have never won Grammys. They'd have to "prove" their stance in the industry first.
And while I understand the hate of Justin Bieber, we Britney stans should remember that at some point Britney was in that position.  Out of all the Best New Artist nominees, she has proven that she was indeed the rightful owner of that award. |
I disagree with this a lot. I don't find that the Grammy's are becoming commercial, if they were Lady GaGa or Katy Perry would've won Album of the Year with Justin winning Best New Artist. That didn't happen.
Arcade Fire & Esperanza Spalding winning shows that they are NOT commercial whatsoever.
Lady GaGa, Rihanna, and Taylor Swift, whether you like them or not, have all definitely proved their stand in the industry in my opinion. They're huge artists with great talent and two of them even write every song on their entire albums. 
And as much as I love Britney, she didn't deserve the award over Christina. I prefer Brit over Christina any day, but Christina's voice was stellar when she came out and it was worth rewarding. Just because Britney's numbers were bigger doesn't mean that she was the better "Best New Artist" at the time. Grammy's are going to tend to give awards to people with better voices / musical talent.
Quote:
Originally posted by Johnald.
Justin Bieber is a Communist.
|
Quote:
Originally posted by inspiration4
This is not just about last year. He's referring to the past decade. Single Ladies was an exception, no? I can't remember any truly pop acts winning in the years before, but maybe i'm wrong.
|
What I don't understand is why everyone looks at the genre of pop music as so one dimensional. Amy Winehouse swept the 4 main awards, and in my opinion, she's still pop music.
Pop = popular music to me, not just a "pop" sound. Amy's music was a R&B/Jazz/ POP album, and I'm one of her biggest fans!
Quote:
Originally posted by Ace Reject
It seems to me that Mr. Stoute doesn't want the Grammys to even nominally reward the best; but the most popular - to essentially act as nothing but a promotional tool.
I don't like that idea - that's why we have the People's Choice Awards, the AMAs, etc and so forth.
|
Exactly!!!
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/29/2010
Posts: 19,102
|
I'm going to clock this ****.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/1/2010
Posts: 65,177
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Slice
I agree when you say even if Eminem's Marshall Mathers LP was robbed by Steely Dylan, Recovery was not because it's not as good as his first ones (even if I like it I can see that SSLP, MMLP and The Eminem Show was better, 8 Mile OST too).
But I don't agree when you say :
"And rap will win when it's deserving. Outside of ROTY, I don't think rap should have won anywhere else."
hmm what ? Ready To Die, Illmatic, Reasonable Doubt, Marshall Mathers LP, Late Registration. I can think about great classics which could have won that easily.
|
I was talking about this year's winners. 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/1/2010
Posts: 65,177
|
Quote:
Originally posted by RudeBoy
Need You Now won both RoTY & SoTY.
A nobody won Best New Artist. (Don't tell me Florence didn't deserve it.) |
What makes Esperanza a "nobody"? Because you don't know who she is? 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 7/27/2004
Posts: 3,188
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Rainbows
I disagree with this a lot. I don't find that the Grammy's are becoming commercial, if they were Lady GaGa or Katy Perry would've won Album of the Year with Justin winning Best New Artist. That didn't happen.
Arcade Fire & Esperanza Spalding winning shows that they are NOT commercial whatsoever.
Lady GaGa, Rihanna, and Taylor Swift, whether you like them or not, have all definitely proved their stand in the industry in my opinion. They're huge artists with great talent and two of them even write every song on their entire albums.
And as much as I love Britney, she didn't deserve the award over Christina. I prefer Brit over Christina any day, but Christina's voice was stellar when she came out and it was worth rewarding. Just because Britney's numbers were bigger doesn't mean that she was the better "Best New Artist" at the time. Grammy's are going to tend to give awards to people with better voices / musical talent. |
It wasn't until recently that a song like "Single Ladies" broke the stereotype for SOTY. It IS getting more and more commercial.
And it's not necessarily about the voice, surely there were people who voted for Britney during that period (IIRC, predictors were guessing Britney and Macy Gray for the win), it's just OVERTIME Britney has proven that she was the better artist. Just like Kanye West has proven that over Maroon 5. I can name countless others.
The Grammys was a snubfest back then, nowadays they seem to reward more deserving artists instead of obscure ones. Reason why? They need the ratings. It's been slipping and slipping throughout the years. But I still believe, when it comes to be Best New Artist, they are most likely going to reward the obscure and talented one than the popular and talented one.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 9/25/2001
Posts: 26,816
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Violet Skye
It wasn't until recently that a song like "Single Ladies" broke the stereotype for SOTY. It IS getting more and more commercial.
And it's not necessarily about the voice, surely there were people who voted for Britney during that period (IIRC, predictors were guessing Britney and Macy Gray for the win), it's just OVERTIME Britney has proven that she was the better artist. Just like Kanye West has proven that over Maroon 5. I can name countless others.
The Grammys was a snubfest back then, nowadays they seem to reward more deserving artists instead of obscure ones. Reason why? They need the ratings. It's been slipping and slipping throughout the years. But I still believe, when it comes to be Best New Artist, they are most likely going to reward the obscure and talented one than the popular and talented one.
|
" Kiss From a Rose" by Seal (1996)
" Sunny Came Home" by Shawn Colvin (1998)
" My Heart Will Go On" by Celine Dion (1999)
" Fallin'" by Alicia Keys (2002)
" Daughters" by John Mayer (2005)
" Rehab" by Amy Winehouse (2008)
" Viva la Vida" by Coldplay (2009)
All of these won Song of the Year before " Single Ladies." They might not be the extremely upbeat, fun pop songs, but they're ALL pop songs and most of them are commercial as well.
I just don't see any argument here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
