The Annual Grammy Awards - General Discussion

[UYI]

Kesha and Lorde were robbed, plain and simple.

I really wish a country song had been chosen for the Las Vegas tribute.

The Chuck Berry and Fats Domino tribute was NOT long enough, especially considering how many people were there singing OLDER hits.

I wanted a Gregg Allman tribute, damn it! :'(

And once again, the Grammys does a better job of honoring country artists than the CMAs or ACMs usually do, both in terms of awards and their In Memoriam segment (that said, the CMAs In Memoriam this past year was GREAT). 

[movingtargetgal]

2 hours ago, Commando Cody said:

I'm not sure why Elton agreed to do a song with Miley. 

Elton enjoys performing with younger artist.  He performed at the grammys with Eminem and Ed Sheeran.  In the past I have really enjoyed this.  Elton is having so much fun and the younger artist has this look on their face that scream : I'm up here sing with Elton Fricken John.  This duet with Miley was not good.  She totally over sang it.  You don't need to do that with a classic like Tiny Dancer.

[GreatKazu]

2 hours ago, 27bored said:

...well shit. 

Congrats to Bruno! I was kinda expecting to be disappointed. 

Bruno, you’re being shitty like Adele was last year. THANK THE TEAM OF PEOPLE WHO HELPED YOU MAKE THE ALBUM YOU JUST WON A FUCKING GRAMMY FOR! 

 

Damn. These musicians really have no grace or class. They have this team behind them and they want to thank everybody in the world but them.

I thought he thanked his team when he won Song of the Year. They were on stage with him and he mentioned their names.

[DisneyBoy]

Found LuPone's performance on YT....and damn. Thrilling much?

[Apathy]

3 hours ago, UYI said:

Kesha and Lorde were robbed, plain and simple.

Agreed. If I didn't think Ed Sheeran was overrated before, I sure as hell do now. "Shape of You" is probably his worst song. And how long was this show, like 3 and 1/2 hours? They could've easily made time for Lorde to sing.

5 hours ago, truthaboutluv said:

Yeah I felt really bad for not liking it because of the meaning behind the performance but their voices just did not go very well with the song. And Tears In Heaven is one of my all time favorite songs. 

Glad I'm not the only one who thought this was a mediocre performance at best, especially the guy on the far right (I forget his name), his mumbling "heaven" was really irritating.

4 hours ago, Gemma Violet said:

5 hours ago, Commando Cody said:

Those were some disinterested people sitting there after Patti LuPone's brilliant performance. 

Yeah, geez, couldn't they at least be polite and pretend to be interested in such an iconic performance.  

I know, right? What was their problem? It's freaking Evita, people!! 

[27bored]

4 hours ago, GreatKazu said:

I thought he thanked his team when he won Song of the Year. They were on stage with him and he mentioned their names.

You could be right since I only turned on the Grammys to in time to see Chris Stapleton and Emmylou Harris perform, and AOTY. But that was SOTY. A lot of those people will probably never get another chance to stand on stage at the Grammys. Don’t stand up there, three sheets to the wind, thanking everybody but the people who got you the damn award. It’s tacky. 

[vibeology]

Neil Portnow has been President of the Grammys for as long as I can remember but maybe not for much longer:

Grammy President: Women need to "step up"

Choice quotes include:

Quote

I think it has to begin with women who have the creativity in their hearts and their souls — who want to be musicians, who want to be engineers, who want to be producers, who want to be part of the industry on an executive level — to step up, because I think they would be welcome

Way to not get it, Neil. Women aren't being shut out of the Grammys because they're not trying; they're being shut out because they're trying and not being rewarded. Alessia Cara was the only solo woman to accept an award live yesterday. Lorde was the only woman nominated for AOTY and the only AOTY nominee not offered a performance slot. I had to sit through Sting and Shaggy's Subway adventure and Sam Smith who was nominated for fuck all so don't say there wasn't time. The issues aren't that the women aren't stepping up. It's an institutional problem. I've said this in years past when talking about the race issues within the Grammys that I'd love a breakdown of the voting body. I'd guess its majority white male and with music, which is so personal, people will vote for music that they connect with. A majority white male voting body is going to have a harder time connecting with music about issues faced exclusively by women or poc. The Oscars are actively working on their diversity problem and want to create a voting body that lines up better with the demographics of the film industry. I've not heard one thing about the Grammys doing the same despite complaints and backlash (and Blue Ribbon Committees don't count because that isn't fixing the problem, only fixing the vote.) The only thing to blame for women being shut out of awards recognition are the Grammys themselves.

[mtlchick]

I would like to see the full press conference with Portnoy to figure out how many face palms I need to do.  At least I can say "How tone deaf is he, pun intended?" 

15 minutes ago, vibeology said:

The Oscars are actively working on their diversity problem and want to create a voting body that lines up better with the demographics of the film industry. I've not heard one thing about the Grammys doing the same despite complaints and backlash (and Blue Ribbon Committees don't count because that isn't fixing the problem, only fixing the vote.) 

That's what I was saying about the Oscar nods last week: Get Out and Lady Bird would be two movies that wouldn't have been considered 5 years ago but I appreciate that the Oscars figured that the voting member demographics were flawed and skewed in one direction and are making changes to even out the playing field.  

 

In the year of the Time's Up and Me Too movement, and with performances like Kesha, these comments from Portnoy are pretty damn insulting. 

[ancslove]

The comments are also weird, because it would have been easier (if still disingenuous) to point out that women won AOTY the last two years.  But the Grammys have had a weird tug of war between popularity and “artistry” for some time.  Women have dominated pop radio and sales for the last twenty years, until maybe last year or so.  But female pop stars like Miley Cyrus or Katy Perry or even Lady Gaga and Taylor Swift aren’t deemed worthy of winning major Grammy categories.  

[Lady Iris]

14 hours ago, Ohwell said:

James Corden is wearing an ill-fitting suit.

Very ill fitting, I was very surprised. Get thee to a better tailor.

 

11 hours ago, GreatKazu said:

I remember when Lionel Richie beat out Prince in 1985. 

They don't always get it right. 

I remember the night Jethro Tull beat Metallica in the first ever heavy metal category. That just wasn't right.

I have to say Patti Lupone's dress and jewelry were just spectacular. Gotta wonder if Madonna was miffed not to be asked.

Why was Shaggy there? That was odd. Is he having something new coming out?

Sam Smith's outfit looked like something out of Star Trek: TNG.

I always turn the channel when the In Memoriam comes one. I can't bear to hear the waning applause for lesser know people that have passed. Was there any applause going on during the song?

[mtlchick]

2 minutes ago, Lady Iris said:

Why was Shaggy there? That was odd. Is he having something new coming out?

An album with Sting.  You read that right.  

https://www.billboard.com/articles/news/8096062/shaggy-sting-album-dont-make-me-wait

[UYI]

15 minutes ago, Lady Iris said:

.

I always turn the channel when the In Memoriam comes one. I can't bear to hear the waning applause for lesser know people that have passed. Was there any applause going on during the song?

I don't think so. I think the segment itself was loud enough to drown any background noise out. 

[ChromaKelly]

1 hour ago, vibeology said:

Neil Portnow has been President of the Grammys for as long as I can remember but maybe not for much longer:

Grammy President: Women need to "step up"

Choice quotes include:

Way to not get it, Neil. Women aren't being shut out of the Grammys because they're not trying; they're being shut out because they're trying and not being rewarded. Alessia Cara was the only solo woman to accept an award live yesterday. Lorde was the only woman nominated for AOTY and the only AOTY nominee not offered a performance slot. I had to sit through Sting and Shaggy's Subway adventure and Sam Smith who was nominated for fuck all so don't say there wasn't time. The issues aren't that the women aren't stepping up. It's an institutional problem. I've said this in years past when talking about the race issues within the Grammys that I'd love a breakdown of the voting body. I'd guess its majority white male and with music, which is so personal, people will vote for music that they connect with. A majority white male voting body is going to have a harder time connecting with music about issues faced exclusively by women or poc. The Oscars are actively working on their diversity problem and want to create a voting body that lines up better with the demographics of the film industry. I've not heard one thing about the Grammys doing the same despite complaints and backlash (and Blue Ribbon Committees don't count because that isn't fixing the problem, only fixing the vote.) The only thing to blame for women being shut out of awards recognition are the Grammys themselves.

That was an extremely tone deaf thing to say, given the current climate, the Me Too movement, AND Kesha's powerful performance accompanied by many of the biggest female performers. Just so WTF. Way to step in it, dude.

Edited January 29, 2018 by ChromaKelly

[kili]

Quote

A majority white male voting body is going to have a harder time connecting with music about issues faced exclusively by women or poc. 

The major 4 awards (AOTY, ROTY, SOTY, BNA) all went to either a person of colour or a woman (Bruno and Allessia). Last year, same thing (Adele and Chance). Two years ago, Ed and his female co-writer won song of the year, but the rest of the awards went to women (Taylor and Meghan). The year before, the awards all went to men, but three of those went to an openly gay man. There is a lot of diversity in the big winners.

Some genres like Urban (especially Rap) and Rock is almost exclusively male. Country has become more male dominated in the last 10 years. Pop has been traditionally female, but is skewing male these days.  Behind the scenes, males are completely dominant. Its the industry itself, not the awards show that causes this problem. On-demand services and streaming are making the situation worse as males tend to really dominate those new media.  Why is the audience doing this?

[rcc]

13 hours ago, Commando Cody said:

Those were some disinterested people sitting there after Patti LuPone's brilliant performance. 

Missed that. Who were they? Other artists?

[Medicine Crow]

I laughed out loud that Tony Bennett stood in the same place he made the announcement & Rihanna had to almost step on his feet to accept her award.  Really funny!!!  (His "handler" really blew it!!)

[DrSparkles]

God damn!! Patti!!!!!!!

[Superpole2000]

7 hours ago, vibeology said:

Neil Portnow has been President of the Grammys for as long as I can remember but maybe not for much longer:

Grammy President: Women need to "step up"

Choice quotes include:

Way to not get it, Neil. Women aren't being shut out of the Grammys because they're not trying; they're being shut out because they're trying and not being rewarded. Alessia Cara was the only solo woman to accept an award live yesterday. Lorde was the only woman nominated for AOTY and the only AOTY nominee not offered a performance slot. I had to sit through Sting and Shaggy's Subway adventure and Sam Smith who was nominated for fuck all so don't say there wasn't time. The issues aren't that the women aren't stepping up. It's an institutional problem. I've said this in years past when talking about the race issues within the Grammys that I'd love a breakdown of the voting body. I'd guess its majority white male and with music, which is so personal, people will vote for music that they connect with. A majority white male voting body is going to have a harder time connecting with music about issues faced exclusively by women or poc. The Oscars are actively working on their diversity problem and want to create a voting body that lines up better with the demographics of the film industry. I've not heard one thing about the Grammys doing the same despite complaints and backlash (and Blue Ribbon Committees don't count because that isn't fixing the problem, only fixing the vote.) The only thing to blame for women being shut out of awards recognition are the Grammys themselves.

I agree, he is a goober for saying that.

But Alicia Keys and Adele each have 15 Grammy wins. Beyonce has 22. Alison Krauss has 27. Adele is the only artist to ever win Record, Song, and Album of the Year in the same year multiple times. The five youngest winners of Album of the Year are women (Swift, Morissette, Streisand, Hill, and Adele). Since 1990, women have won Album of the Year 12 times, while men have won 15 times. We can go through many facts and figures, and yes I have seen the percentage of nominees who are male. The fact is that there have been plenty of successful women at the Grammys. That didn't happen this year, but women winning every year is not equality either.

If you want to keep gender and diversity score at the Grammys then I suggest you stop watching the Grammys. They are so unimportant anyway. If anyone wants to support female artists, they can go directly to the source and buy the music/performances themselves. It's easy to "discover" artists you want to hear on your own these days.

Flavor Flav's "Who gives a fuck about a goddamn Grammy?" lyric is 30 years old, but it still rings true. They have always been at least a step behind. The Beatles lost Album of the Year four times to Frank Sinatra (twice), Glen Campbell, and Blood, Sweat & Tears. The Beatles never won Record of the Year because The Beatles just never could make a good enough song.

[cpcathy]

I'm starting to think there are inherent issues with the Grammys. Music is so subjective, we like what we like, I will fight (nearly) to the death to defend my favorite band, who are hated by others. I do feel that the Academy loves women, when a female artist wins in any given year, she wins BIG--Taylor Swift, Norah Jones, Lauryn Hill, Beyoncé, Bonnie Rait, Adele (overshowered with praise, in my opinion). I think the whole system and the show need to be overhauled.

[Annber03]

9 minutes ago, cpcathy said:

Music is so subjective, we like what we like, 

So true. I saw some people complaining about some of the newer artists, especially the rap and hip hop artists, elsewhere on the internet, and going on about how it wasn't "real music", and that tends to get to me a little. People need to remember that just because a certain artist or genre isn't their particular cup of tea, that doesn't mean it's not music at all, or that it's automatic trash or whatever. There's artists I don't care for, either, but more power to those who do like them, I say.  

And on that note...

Quote

I will fight (nearly) to the death to defend my favorite band, who are hated by others. 

What band is that :D? 

[cpcathy]

9 minutes ago, Annber03 said:

And on that note...

What band is that :D? 

Hmm, you can't tell?

[Commando Cody]

6 hours ago, rcc said:

Missed that. Who were they? Other artists?

The cameras panned the audience after the song. Most people were standing and applauding. There were a few people just sitting. They just looked bored or annoyed. One looked like she was rolling her eyes. 

[SunnyBeBe]

Every time that I kept tuning in the vocals were so bad that I cringed.  Were their mikes messed up?  But, then I happened to land on Ben Platt, OMG.  So good.  He was awesome.  Glad he got a standing ovation. 

 

[bosawks]

If I can be as fierce as Patti Lupone for just one day my life will be complete.

[27bored]

20 hours ago, truthaboutluv said:

With all due respect, but what? First of all, of course he has detractors or people who aren't moved by him. That's every artist. Some people think Beyonce is overrated, Adele is boring, etc.

Kendrick's name has been at the forefront of many people's mind since his infamous verse on Big Sean's Control. And for the ones who didn't know who he was when he got the slew of nominations for his Good Kid, M.A.A.D City album, they all knew after his amazing Grammy performance with Imagine Dragons, that everyone was talking about the next day. Kind of like his performance at the Grammys two years ago and likely tonight again. 

Alright from To Pimp A Butterfly became a rallying cry for the #BlackLivesMatter movement. To Pimp A Butterfly solidified Kendrick as the one of the biggest names in Hip Hop/Rap period. He had the biggest selling rap album this past year, Humble was a BB #1, he was trending all over social media when he released his album at midnight, etc. Sure there are a bunch of flashes in the pan like Cardi B that people talk about (see Iggy Azalea a few years ago) but that doesn't mean Kendrick isn't present or known as those.

So, you're right, but this is kind of making my point. I'm not talking about detractors, per se. I'm talking about people who might respect Kendrick as an artist, like a song here and there, but aren't necessarily into him. It's a little different than the conversation people normally have as fans, because fans, especially in hip-hop, tend to think you're either a stan or a hater with no in-between. They don't always appreciate that Grammy voters may not be into someone like The Culture is. Kendrick definitely deserved to be in the conversation for AOTY given the quality of DAMN, his sales, and the impact it had. And he managed to win, like, four Grammys last night. I don't think it's a slight that he didn't win the big prize.

I will give you the vote splitting because many critics who called Bruno's winning, though they thought Kendrick deserved it, predicted that would happen and that's how Bruno would win. But I'm going to dismiss the bolded part to say the same thing I said the last time this happened. This has fuck all to do with voters being so happy to hear singing of songs and everything to do with their never respecting and acknowledging Hip Hop/Rap as a legitimate genre. Because they were ignoring them when Pop and singing of songs was dominating the airwaves. It is no coincidence that no Rap/Hip Hop song has ever won SOTY or ROTY.

I think there is a broader point to be made about Grammy voters not respecting Hip-Hop as a genre, but I also think there's a fairly straightforward reason for that: most Grammy voters like to hear people sing. Rap is cool, but it's sort of a category unto itself. I think singing is kind of undervalued in mainstream music -- we're drawn to good singers, but hit songs are about so much more besides just the person having a great voice. Even someone like Chris Stapleton. He's a Grammy darling, and he sells records, but Country radio doesn't really play him. I think what happens is we undervalue singing and then when Grammy time comes around we're confused why that song won. It's usually because that song has a familiar quality to it.

I know that's true for a song that was nominated this year "Crew" by Goldlink. The chorus is sung by a guy in the group Sonder (their song is on the trailer for the new season of Atlanta, called "Too Fast"). The chorus almost sounds like a sample from the mid-90s, because it sounds like how R&B used to sound.

Of course, all of this is academic, because 24K Magic swept the top categories this year and Bruno isn't exactly crooning on it. It's not a strictly rap song, but it's more of a throwback hip-hop jam than a current-day pop song.

He campaigns. Maybe not aggressively but he does. Because while yes, it shouldn't be about awards, it does say something to someone to feel like their effort is rewarded. And yes, I know he's won many of the Rap categories and so at this point, he has like at least 10 awards.  But there is no way I imagine it doesn't suck for Kendrick to have to hear people go on about his having the best album and all the praise and still come up short. It's so sad that a music critic at Billboard, when just predicting who would get nominated, said Kendrick would and he was his pick to win but that he knew he wouldn't. Even back then, they knew.

I'll take your word for it that he campaigns (I know a lot of that is behind-the-scenes stuff). I actually think they did Kendrick a disservice by nominating four other rap albums with him. To be honest, and well you saw, I thought Kendrick was going to win. Childish Gambino's album was kind of under the radar (Redbone notwithstanding, although I like Cee-Lo's version 10X better than the original), Lorde's album was good but not AOTY worthy since I don't even think her casual fans really engaged with that album, and Jay Z's album had that uncomfortable corporate tie-in with Sprint that I think turns off people on a gut level, plus like I said last year with Lemonade -- Grammy voters don't give a fuck about Bey-Z's marital woes. Blogs who need content might, but they don't and I don't either.

For me, that left Bruno Mars and Kendrick. I liked Bruno Mars' album, but I felt like 1) it was old (I know, I know), 2) it was short, and 3) it was just Bruno doing what he did with Uptown Funk a few years back. It's...a trick we've seen before. I almost think he won because people remembered his performance on last year's Grammys and they were voting for that moreso than the merits of his album. He's turned into quite the performer, and as a hip-hop classicist, he does good work. But I wasn't moved by it, really. I thought Kendrick's album, out of that group, held together the best, it told a story, good production, it had the sells and the hits to be on people's radar. But like I said, bookended with other rap albums, they probably canceled each other out.

[GaT]

6 hours ago, cpcathy said:

Music is so subjective, we like what we like, 

It's the same with the movies, plays, books, even some sports. We like what we like & there's no way to really judge them subjectively. 

4 hours ago, SunnyBeBe said:

Every time that I kept tuning in the vocals were so bad that I cringed.  Were their mikes messed up?  But, then I happened to land on Ben Platt, OMG.  So good.  He was awesome.  Glad he got a standing ovation. 

 

 

I had no idea who he was until they did a close up of his face & then I screamed "it's Benji from Pitch Perfect!"

[vibeology]

14 hours ago, Superpole2000 said:

I agree, he is a goober for saying that.

But Alicia Keys and Adele each have 15 Grammy wins. Beyonce has 22. Alison Krauss has 27. Adele is the only artist to ever win Record, Song, and Album of the Year in the same year multiple times. The five youngest winners of Album of the Year are women (Swift, Morissette, Streisand, Hill, and Adele). Since 1990, women have won Album of the Year 12 times, while men have won 15 times. We can go through many facts and figures, and yes I have seen the percentage of nominees who are male. The fact is that there have been plenty of successful women at the Grammys. That didn't happen this year, but women winning every year is not equality either.

If you want to keep gender and diversity score at the Grammys then I suggest you stop watching the Grammys. They are so unimportant anyway. If anyone wants to support female artists, they can go directly to the source and buy the music/performances themselves. It's easy to "discover" artists you want to hear on your own these days.

Flavor Flav's "Who gives a fuck about a goddamn Grammy?" lyric is 30 years old, but it still rings true. They have always been at least a step behind. The Beatles lost Album of the Year four times to Frank Sinatra (twice), Glen Campbell, and Blood, Sweat & Tears. The Beatles never won Record of the Year because The Beatles just never could make a good enough song.

I'm not asking for women to win every year. I'm not asking for poc to win every year. I know that's both ridiculous and unrealistic. All I've personally called for for two years now is a demographic breakdown of Grammy voters. I just want to know who is voting in the General Award categories and if that lines up with the public at large. Because I bet it doesn't even come close and I think that matters. The Grammys don't need to be a step behind. They could easily take similar steps to the Oscars and you'd see that reflected in nominees and winners very quickly.

And I agree that at the end of the day, Grammys don't matter the same way acting awards do. You win an Oscar or an Emmy and you get to use that to negotiate salaries, get roles etc. Grammys aren't like that. They are more of a short term marketing venue. You perform and get your music in front of an audience. Praying went back up the iTunes charts after Sunday, for example. But the fact that Grammys aren't as important as Oscars doesn't mean it isn't important to call out problems within the Grammys awarding system because they still are the most prestigious awards in music.

And I worry that a great deal of this makes it seem like I don't like Bruno Mars. I love him. I own all of his albums. They are great and having a poc win AOTY for the first time in 10 years (crazy considering who is driving trends in music) is important. But I also think it's okay to be somewhat critical of Bruno when it comes to the awards wins. Bruno is a poc but he is non-black. He makes music that is heavily inspired by black artists like James Brown, Bobby Brown, Michael Jackson etc. James Brown never won a general field Grammy. Bruno picked up three this week. Bruno is a "safer" artist than someone like James Brown. His skin is lighter, he is physically small and cute and obviously this is a different time but it's very telling that he can get a win. And none of that is Bruno's fault and it doesn't take away from his talent, but it's worth examining if artists who own their Other-ness get a fair shake from the Grammys or if the only way for a black/other poc  or women artists to be rewarded is if they do something "safer"? And that comes back to the voting body. Who are these people? Do they represent our broader culture? And this is something I think about for about three or four days a year and then I move on. But it's something Neil Portnow should be thinking about every fucking day. Because if the voting body isn't representative of the audience, the audience will vanish and then there will be no Grammys at all.

[truthaboutluv]

YMMV but I find the whole #GrammysSoMale fight a bit disingenuous, reactionary and another example of why some have expressed this concern of some taking what is a very real issue in the entertainment industry and the world and turning it into a witch hunt and attack mode, which in turn, will turn others off. That said, I am angrier at the stupid Recording Academy's President for his incredibly tone deaf and dumb statement, which has only allowed the whole hashtag/drama to pick up more steam.

As others have stated, all the President had to do was to state the facts and leave it at that - e.g. that we're coming off a previous year where women dominated the nominations and wins and so for some to create some bandwagon of men alone being honored at the Grammys is a little unfair. Also, that Adele, a woman, is the only artist to complete the Triple Win of AOTY, ROTY and SOTY, twice, that women match men very closely in total wins in the major categories, etc. When you come with actual numbers and stats and keep emotion out of stuff, that's harder to dispute. Instead his dumbass came there talking about women needing to step up more like they're somehow not pulling their weight in the industry, which is bullshit. 

 

14 hours ago, 27bored said:

It's a little different than the conversation people normally have as fans, because fans, especially in hip-hop, tend to think you're either a stan or a hater with no in-between.

That's actually most fans in most genres and I'd say that's even more the case in Pop music. 

 

14 hours ago, 27bored said:

They don't always appreciate that Grammy voters may not be into someone like The Culture is.

Again, that's most fans of most artists. I don't think anyone expects everyone to like or get every artist. And regarding the major categories, the understanding is that the entire Academy votes on those, including other artists, writers, producers, etc. from all genres. So yes, I'm sure many are well aware that you have some voters who will not be a fan of an artist's music. It is to be expected. That said, when you have an artist who has had every single one of his full length albums nominated for AOTY (off the top of my head, I can't think of an artist in recent time where that's been the case. Not even the great Adele had her first album 19, nominated for AOTY), is heralded by the same industry that votes on these awards, is critically deified across genres (no, the Rap/Hip Hop critics aren't the only ones declaring his albums amazing and genius), sells very well for the normal standard (meaning not your Adele or Taylor Swift who are the anomaly at this point in record sales) and yet EVERY SINGLE TIME, somehow there's some reason and excuse for why he's just not exactly good enough to win the major awards,  there is something suspect and fucked up about that. That audience on Sunday night was an audience of the same industry people who vote and there were boos when Bruno won. 

 

14 hours ago, 27bored said:

I don't think it's a slight that he didn't win the big prize.

And I do. Frankly, I don't even think it's a slight and just plain insulting. Not so much the loss to Bruno, who once again, I am a fan of, but the writing was on the wall when he first he lost every award he was nominated for with his first album, including the Rap ones, to Mackelmore (no words) and later AOTY to Taylor Swift's collection of average to decent pop songs that were filled with Max Martin's predictable imprint he's been selling since the 90's.

 

14 hours ago, 27bored said:

I think there is a broader point to be made about Grammy voters not respecting Hip-Hop as a genre, but I also think there's a fairly straightforward reason for that: most Grammy voters like to hear people sing. Rap is cool, but it's sort of a category unto itself.

I won't even mention the amount of overproduced, auto-tuned crap that passes for "singing" in pop music (I mean really, Selena Gomez has a career) but I'm just so over that excuse because as far I'm concerned, then just don't nominate them. That is a bullshit cop-out. 

 

14 hours ago, 27bored said:

Of course, all of this is academic, because 24K Magic swept the top categories this year and Bruno isn't exactly crooning on it. It's not a strictly rap song, but it's more of a throwback hip-hop jam than a current-day pop song.

Bruno's album is R&B/Pop, not Hip Hop or Rap. 

 

14 hours ago, 27bored said:

I almost think he won because people remembered his performance on last year's Grammys and they were voting for that moreso than the merits of his album. He's turned into quite the performer, and as a hip-hop classicist, he does good work.

Again, Bruno's album is R&B/Pop as evidenced by him admitting himself how influenced he is by old school soul and R&B. And if people were being awarded for their previous performances on the Grammy stage, again, you'd think Kendrick would have won that AOTY by now since he's consistently had brilliant performances that get lauded well after the show is over. Bruno won, possibly because yes, voters split the votes between Jay-Z and Kendrick but more so because he's likable, he's considered "safe" and he makes good, fun, music. He's also very talented, well-respected in his own right as a musician, songwriter, producer. He's paid his dues in some way if you will in that he's been around now for almost a decade.

So he won, fair enough. And as I've said, I am a fan of Bruno's and love his music. And it is because I'm a fan that I know that this wasn't even his best album, that Unorthodox Jukebox was way better, yet ironically wasn't even nominated for AOTY and that 24K Magic definitely wasn't the best album of the five albums nominated. As I said the last time Kendrick lost AOTY, I think in many ways what it comes down to is as much respect as he garners in the industry for his talent and ability, he also makes a lot of people uncomfortable with his music.

Hell he even played on that in his performance with the Dave Chapelle bits. There are some who really think Kendrick hates white people and is angry and inciting. Of course these are people who actually never sit and listen to his music. Or his interviews where if you do, you realize he's actually a very nice, mellow and introspective guy who like many other artists, simply uses his music to speak about his truth and experiences. But his intensity and brutal honesty in how he speaks on these experiences make some people uncomfortable. And in these crazy ass times we're in right now, some people just want to dance and have fun and not think about how shitty the world really is. YMMV. 

Edited January 30, 2018 by truthaboutluv

[mtlchick]

3 hours ago, vibeology said:

But it's something Neil Portnow should be thinking about every fucking day. Because if the voting body isn't representative of the audience, the audience will vanish and then there will be no Grammys at all.

I also think he should be thinking it over for other reasons which is numbers.  The ratings were down again.  The #GrammysSoMale caught on and he could have done a lot to temper the complaints but saying "women need to step up" was the WORST he could have come up with. There's an unspoken rule that you either perform at the American Music Awards or Grammys and most would pick the latter because of the weight and prestige it carries and the sales boost it can contain (though with superstars, you get to do both because you bring in viewers._  I think some artists are going to think long and hard for next year as to where they agree to perform even with risking sales.  And CBS can't afford to lose a lot of heavy hitters either. 

 

I think the academy and CBS are going to hope it blows over but it wouldn't surprise me if they send out a release "clarifying" the comments either at a future date. 

[rcc]

19 hours ago, Commando Cody said:

The cameras panned the audience after the song. Most people were standing and applauding. There were a few people just sitting. They just looked bored or annoyed. One looked like she was rolling her eyes. 

Whoever rolled her eyes should be so talented and charismatic as Ms. Lupone. A jealous person would do something like that.

[Quickbeam]

1 hour ago, mtlchick said:

I also think he should be thinking it over for other reasons which is numbers.  The ratings were down again.  The #GrammysSoMale caught on and he could have done a lot to temper the complaints but saying "women need to step up" was the WORST he could have come up with. There's an unspoken rule that you either perform at the American Music Awards or Grammys and most would pick the latter because of the weight and prestige it carries and the sales boost it can contain (though with superstars, you get to do both because you bring in viewers._  I think some artists are going to think long and hard for next year as to where they agree to perform even with risking sales.  And CBS can't afford to lose a lot of heavy hitters either. 

 

I think the academy and CBS are going to hope it blows over but it wouldn't surprise me if they send out a release "clarifying" the comments either at a future date. 

The Portnow thing hit my ear like a "D'oh!". As in that's going to leave a mark. I always thought women had a freer hand in music as opposed to film. But I thought the Lorde thing was really suspect. It felt deliberate. 

[urusai]

11 minutes ago, rcc said:

Whoever rolled her eyes should be so talented and charismatic as Ms. Lupone. A jealous person would do something like that.

She couldn't even bother to look up.  She was looking away with a "next" expression on her face.

[Stuffy]

1 hour ago, Quickbeam said:

The Portnow thing hit my ear like a "D'oh!". As in that's going to leave a mark. I always thought women had a freer hand in music as opposed to film. But I thought the Lorde thing was really suspect. It felt deliberate. 

Given the way women are treated in country music it was even more ridiculous.  They work work work and barely get top 20.  Meanwhile there is a line of male artists many with mediocre songs/music waiting their turn at number one.  The newer male artist also are not asked to do ridiculous stuff like sit on the laps of male DJs or program directors in order to get their song played.  There's a lot of skeevy stuff the women of country music have to deal with.  If they don't follow along, they are punished.  Look at Kasey Musgraves.  She can win the awards, but radio stations refuse to play her music.

[argrow]

I think the #GrammysSoMale started with an study a few years ago that said that of the 899 nominees that were nominated for a Grammy in the last 6 years, 90.7% were male (source: New York Times)

That, followed by the news that Lorde was the only Album of the Year nominee not performing, (even though we have young and hip artists like Sting and U2 singing 30 year old songs for no reason), and the unfortunate optics that all but 2 of the awards awarded on TV was to male artist, it just snowballed from there.

This, of course, is more of an industry problem (as that NYT article says) but the with the Grammys being the most high profiled show of the music industry, criticism was, fairly or not, lobbed at them. Portnow's comment was, of course, unfortunate and tone deaf as well.

[MaggieG]

http://ew.com/music/2018/01/30/alessia-cara-defends-grammy-win/

So full disclosure, I didn't watch the Grammy's (only the highlights) and this is the first time I've heard of Alessia, so I don't know much about her. Is she seriously having to defend herself againts people who are upset she won? This should be one of the highlights of her career and she shouldn't have to apologize for winning. People need to calm down.

[truthaboutluv]

5 hours ago, MaggieG said:

http://ew.com/music/2018/01/30/alessia-cara-defends-grammy-win/

So full disclosure, I didn't watch the Grammy's (only the highlights) and this is the first time I've heard of Alessia, so I don't know much about her. Is she seriously having to defend herself againts people who are upset she won? This should be one of the highlights of her career and she shouldn't have to apologize for winning. People need to calm down.

Huh, I thought commented on this when she won on Sunday. Guess not. Anyway, the controversy around Alessia is that people don't believe she's "New" and so don't think she should have even been nominated in the category, much less win. In other words, a lot of people felt like it was a bit of category fraud if you will. And to be honest, I kind of agree. I will admit that I've been aware of her since 2015, when her song Here sort of exploded and actually expected her to be nominated for new artist last year, because 2016 was a pretty big year for her as well. The problem of course is that the New Artist category is fraught with controversy because the Academy keeps changing the definition of who constitutes as a new artist, damn near every year. 

This is the current definition as per the Academy:

Essentially, a "new artist" is defined for the GRAMMY process as any performing artist or established performing group who releases, during the eligibility year, the recording that first establishes the public identity of that artist or established group as a performer. A GRAMMY nomination in a performance category in a prior year disqualifies an artist from competing in this category, unless the nomination came from a single or a guest spot on another artist's recording, and the artist hadn't yet released a full album.

So this is why this is confusing for a lot of people, regarding Alessia, especially the part about "first establishes the public identity of that artist" because once again, her song Here, went as high as #5 on the Billboard Hot 100 in 2015, her album, released that year, peaked at #9 on the BB Album Charts and in 2016, her song Scars to Your Beautiful reached #8 on the BB Hot 100. All of these by the way were released during the requisite eligibility period. Her 2015 album/singles were released during the eligibility period for the 2016 Grammy Awards and her 2016 singles were released during the eligibility period for the 2017 Grammy Awards. So it did seem a bit "huh" when she was nominated as new for 2018. 

I'm not taking anything away from the girl, she seems very sweet and talented but I do understand why some people are calling foul on her win. 

Edited January 31, 2018 by truthaboutluv

[GaT]

1 hour ago, truthaboutluv said:

Huh, I thought commented on this when she won on Sunday, guess not. Anyway, the controversy around Alessia is that people don't believe she's "New" and so don't think she should have even been nominated in the category, much less win. In other words, a lot of people felt like it was a bit of category fraud if you will. And to be honest, I can of agree. I will admit that I've been aware of her since 2015, when her song Here sort of exploded and actually expected her to be nominated for new artist last year because 2016 was a pretty big year for her as well. The problem of course is that the New Artist category is fraught with controversy because the Academy keeps changing the definition of who constitutes as a new artist, damn near every year. 

This is the current definition as per the Academy:

Essentially, a "new artist" is defined for the GRAMMY process as any performing artist or established performing group who releases, during the eligibility year, the recording that first establishes the public identity of that artist or established group as a performer. A GRAMMY nomination in a performance category in a prior year disqualifies an artist from competing in this category, unless the nomination came from a single or a guest spot on another artist's recording, and the artist hadn't yet released a full album.

So this why this is confusing for a lot of people about Alessia, especially the part about "first establishes the public identity of that artist" because once again, her song Here, went as high as #5 on the Billboard Hot 100 in 2015, her album, released that year, peaked at #9 on the BB Album Charts and in 2016, her song Scars to Your Beautiful reached #8 on the BB Hot 100. All of these by the way were released during the requisite eligibility period. Her 2015 album/singles were released during the eligibility period for the 2016 Grammy Awards and her 2016 singles were released during the eligibility period for the 2017 Grammy Awards. So it did seem a bit "huh" when she was nominated as new for 2018. 

I'm not taking anything away from the girl, she seems very sweet and talented but I do understand why some people are calling foul on her win. 

And now that she's won Best New Artist, I guess her career is over LOL

Here's a fun fact I just learned. In 2010 these were some of the artists nominated for Best New Artist:

Drake

Florence and the Machine

Justin Bieber

Mumford & Sons

Guess who won? None of the above, the award went to Esperanza Spalding. Yep, Esperanza Spalding. That award sure helped her career.

Edited January 31, 2018 by GaT

[truthaboutluv]

56 minutes ago, GaT said:

And now that she's won Best New Artist, I guess her career is over LOL

Here's a fun fact I just learned. In 2010 these were some of the artists nominated for Best New Artist:

Drake

Florence and the Machine

Justin Bieber

Mumford & Sons

Guess who won? None of the above, the award went to Esperanza Spalding. Yep, Esperanza Spalding. That award sure helped her career.

 

And then you had winners like Adele, Maroon 5, Alicia Keys, John Legend and Carrie Underwood. Considering Esperanza is a Jazz singer/musician,  I don't think anyone expected that she'd blow up when she won BNA. 

Edited January 31, 2018 by truthaboutluv

[Caseysgirl]

Late to the party as I just watch the re- showing of this tonight but how did a lot of that audience listen to Kesha's song and not feel like a bunch of hypocrites and asses. I'm sure the majority of the males in the music industry who are widely acclaimed (I can think of Dr. Dre as someone whose documentary discussed it openly) are guilty of something for which their "Times Up".

[sandrajane]

On 1/31/2018 at 3:28 PM, truthaboutluv said:

Huh, I thought commented on this when she won on Sunday. Guess not. Anyway, the controversy around Alessia is that people don't believe she's "New" and so don't think she should have even been nominated in the category, much less win. In other words, a lot of people felt like it was a bit of category fraud if you will. And to be honest, I kind of agree. I will admit that I've been aware of her since 2015, when her song Here sort of exploded and actually expected her to be nominated for new artist last year, because 2016 was a pretty big year for her as well. The problem of course is that the New Artist category is fraught with controversy because the Academy keeps changing the definition of who constitutes as a new artist, damn near every year. 

This is the current definition as per the Academy:

Essentially, a "new artist" is defined for the GRAMMY process as any performing artist or established performing group who releases, during the eligibility year, the recording that first establishes the public identity of that artist or established group as a performer. A GRAMMY nomination in a performance category in a prior year disqualifies an artist from competing in this category, unless the nomination came from a single or a guest spot on another artist's recording, and the artist hadn't yet released a full album.

So this is why this is confusing for a lot of people, regarding Alessia, especially the part about "first establishes the public identity of that artist" because once again, her song Here, went as high as #5 on the Billboard Hot 100 in 2015, her album, released that year, peaked at #9 on the BB Album Charts and in 2016, her song Scars to Your Beautiful reached #8 on the BB Hot 100. All of these by the way were released during the requisite eligibility period. Her 2015 album/singles were released during the eligibility period for the 2016 Grammy Awards and her 2016 singles were released during the eligibility period for the 2017 Grammy Awards. So it did seem a bit "huh" when she was nominated as new for 2018. 

I'm not taking anything away from the girl, she seems very sweet and talented but I do understand why some people are calling foul on her win. 

One of the key requirements for a BNA nomination is to release a full length (more than six songs) album in the eligibility period.  The cutoff for Grammy nods is October 31st.  Her debut album was released Nov. 13th, 2015.     She couldn't have gotten a BNA nomination for the 2016 awards.  Now, why she didn't get it for the 2017 ceremony is another question.

Also this:

A GRAMMY nomination in a performance category in a prior year disqualifies an artist from competing in this category, unless the nomination came from a single or a guest spot on another artist's recording, and the artist hadn't yet released a full album.

is no longer true.  They changed the rule after 2009 because Lady Gaga was nominated for Just Dance in the Best Dance category, and so was disqualified for BNA the next year.  It was changed to only if you were nominated in one of the main categories (ROTY or SOTY).  And then the rule was relaxed in 2014 so that Meghan Trainor and Hozier weren't disqualified.

[truthaboutluv]

On 2/3/2018 at 10:07 PM, sandrajane said:

Also this:

A GRAMMY nomination in a performance category in a prior year disqualifies an artist from competing in this category, unless the nomination came from a single or a guest spot on another artist's recording, and the artist hadn't yet released a full album.

is no longer true.  They changed the rule after 2009 because Lady Gaga was nominated for Just Dance in the Best Dance category, and so was disqualified for BNA the next year.  It was changed to only if you were nominated in one of the main categories (ROTY or SOTY).  And then the rule was relaxed in 2014 so that Meghan Trainor and Hozier weren't disqualified.

I'm actually aware that rule was modified because I remembered the Lady Gaga drama. But someone should tell whoever handles the Academy's official website that because that's the definition they still have. And that's exactly why I said the BNA category is always fraught with this kind of controversy and confusion because no one really knows who qualifies as new, including the Academy itself. 

[27bored]

On 1/30/2018 at 11:07 AM, truthaboutluv said:

YMMV but I find the whole #GrammysSoMale fight a bit disingenuous, reactionary and another example of why some have expressed this concern of some taking what is a very real issue in the entertainment industry and the world and turning it into a witch hunt and attack mode, which in turn, will turn others off. That said, I am angrier at the stupid Recording Academy's President for his incredibly tone deaf and dumb statement, which has only allowed the whole hashtag/drama to pick up more steam.

As others have stated, all the President had to do was to state the facts and leave it at that - e.g. that we're coming off a previous year where women dominated the nominations and wins and so for some to create some bandwagon of men alone being honored at the Grammys is a little unfair. Also, that Adele, a woman, is the only artist to complete the Triple Win of AOTY, ROTY and SOTY, twice, that women match men very closely in total wins in the major categories, etc. When you come with actual numbers and stats and keep emotion out of stuff, that's harder to dispute. Instead his dumbass came there talking about women needing to step up more like they're somehow not pulling their weight in the industry, which is bullshit. 

Completely agree.

That's actually most fans in most genres and I'd say that's even more the case in Pop music.

I don't know about that. With certain people in Pop music, you can't say anything about them (i.e. Beyonce), but I think people can be more middle of the road in other genres. In Hip-Hop? It's a bit more extreme, one way or the other. Just my experience.

 

Again, that's most fans of most artists. I don't think anyone expects everyone to like or get every artist. And regarding the major categories, the understanding is that the entire Academy votes on those, including other artists, writers, producers, etc. from all genres. So yes, I'm sure many are well aware that you have some voters who will not be a fan of an artist's music. It is to be expected. That said, when you have an artist who has had every single one of his full length albums nominated for AOTY (off the top of my head, I can't think of an artist in recent time where that's been the case. Not even the great Adele had her first album 19, nominated for AOTY), is heralded by the same industry that votes on these awards, is critically deified across genres (no, the Rap/Hip Hop critics aren't the only ones declaring his albums amazing and genius), sells very well for the normal standard (meaning not your Adele or Taylor Swift who are the anomaly at this point in record sales) and yet EVERY SINGLE TIME, somehow there's some reason and excuse for why he's just not exactly good enough to win the major awards,  there is something suspect and fucked up about that. That audience on Sunday night was an audience of the same industry people who vote and there were boos when Bruno won.

I understand your point, but I think that's when you have to look at 1) the other nominees, and 2) what was ubiquitous, or broad-reaching, about that person and/or their album. There are people who may be fans of rappers, but not necessarily fans of rap, you know what I mean? Kendrick might be at the top of the heap of rappers for Grammy voters, but hip-hop isn't their primary genre. They would prefer a great vocal album with good songwriting than a hip-hop album with great rapping, but they appreciate what Kendrick does.

I think that's even true with some people's end-of-the-year best-of lists. They might have liked DAMN enough to put it on the list to the exclusion of most other hip-hop releases, but not more than, say, Bjork's latest album, or either of Chris Stapleton's releases.

 

And I do. Frankly, I don't even think it's a slight and just plain insulting. Not so much the loss to Bruno, who once again, I am a fan of, but the writing was on the wall when he first he lost every award he was nominated for with his first album, including the Rap ones, to Mackelmore (no words) and later AOTY to Taylor Swift's collection of average to decent pop songs that were filled with Max Martin's predictable imprint he's been selling since the 90's.

So, the Macklemore thing is something that is destined to happen, every once in awhile. Meaning, Macklemore had hits ("Can't Hold Us", "Thrift Shop"?) and "Same Love". Not too many rappers, not even Kendrick, would start a rap song with "when I was young I thought I was gay..." I think they gave him that just for the subject matter. Same with Diddy winning Best Rap Album the year after Biggie died. He had "I'll Be Missing You" that sampled that Sting song, and it got everyone's attention. So, sometimes that's all it takes. Unfortunately. Kendrick still swept up this year, so I'm not too upset.

 

I won't even mention the amount of overproduced, auto-tuned crap that passes for "singing" in pop music (I mean really, Selena Gomez has a career) but I'm just so over that excuse because as far I'm concerned, then just don't nominate them. That is a bullshit cop-out.

It's...not an excuse, though. I think most people would rather hear singing than rapping. That doesn't mean rap doesn't stand a chance; it's just that when it comes down to a choice, the rap album needs to be better than the singing album for it to stand a chance. And, very often, that's not the case. I think Kendrick is one of the handful of artists capable of making an album that could stand toe to toe with some of the best sung albums.

 

Bruno's album is R&B/Pop, not Hip Hop or Rap.

I was referring to the song itself, not the album as a whole.

 

Again, Bruno's album is R&B/Pop as evidenced by him admitting himself how influenced he is by old school soul and R&B. And if people were being awarded for their previous performances on the Grammy stage, again, you'd think Kendrick would have won that AOTY by now since he's consistently had brilliant performances that get lauded well after the show is over. Bruno won, possibly because yes, voters split the votes between Jay-Z and Kendrick but more so because he's likable, he's considered "safe" and he makes good, fun, music. He's also very talented, well-respected in his own right as a musician, songwriter, producer. He's paid his dues in some way if you will in that he's been around now for almost a decade.

So he won, fair enough. And as I've said, I am a fan of Bruno's and love his music. And it is because I'm a fan that I know that this wasn't even his best album, that Unorthodox Jukebox was way better, yet ironically wasn't even nominated for AOTY and that 24K Magic definitely wasn't the best album of the five albums nominated. As I said the last time Kendrick lost AOTY, I think in many ways what it comes down to is as much respect as he garners in the industry for his talent and ability, he also makes a lot of people uncomfortable with his music.

Hell he even played on that in his performance with the Dave Chapelle bits. There are some who really think Kendrick hates white people and is angry and inciting. Of course these are people who actually never sit and listen to his music. Or his interviews where if you do, you realize he's actually a very nice, mellow and introspective guy who like many other artists, simply uses his music to speak about his truth and experiences. But his intensity and brutal honesty in how he speaks on these experiences make some people uncomfortable. And in these crazy ass times we're in right now, some people just want to dance and have fun and not think about how shitty the world really is. YMMV.

True enough. Kendrick makes TEDTALK rap and people want to turn up. At least he's consistently honored at the Grammys as opposed to, say, Lil Uzi or Migos. They get it right to some degree, even if it seems like he's consistently slighted.

[truthaboutluv]

So Kendrick Lamar's DAMN. just won the Pulitzer Prize for Music. Hmm, guess there are some who do think Hip Hop/Rap is actually music. And in case anyone was wondering, no, none of the artists he's lost to over the years have ever won something this prestigious for their music. In fact, it's the first time in almost forever that the award went to a non-classical album. And I look forward to next time he releases an album that the Grammy voters still deem his work not good enough.

[truthaboutluv]

So the Grammy Award nominations were just released and it's a doozy. My most gleeful moment comes from the fact that their perennial overrated favorite Taylor Swift was almost completely shut out. I may be wrong but I think she was only nominated in one category - Pop Vocal Album. And this despite the fact that they've extended the major categories to 8 nominees versus the usual 5. I'm sure that scream you all hear is the Swifties losing their collective minds. 

And in a complete shock, Kendrick Lamar leads the nominations again. I was scratching my head at that one until I remembered that he produced and has a number of songs on The Black Panther Movie Soundtrack. So I guess they found another way to use his name only to likely screw him over again come award time. In any case, I'm sure he's not expecting to win that one. Although it'd be just like the voters to give AOTY for that instead of his solo albums that are all way better. 

Here are the nominees in the key categories. 

Album of the Year

Invasion Of Privacy” — Cardi B
“By The Way, I Forgive You” — Brandi Carlile
“Scorpion” — Drake
“H.E.R.” — H.E.R.
“Beerbongs & Bentleys” — Post Malone
“Dirty Computer” — Janelle Monáe
“Golden Hour” — Kacey Musgraves
“Black Panther: The Album, Music From And Inspired By” (Various Artists)

 

Song of the Year

“All The Stars” — Kendrick Duckworth, Solána Rowe, Al Shuckburgh, Mark Spears & Anthony Tiffith, songwriters (Kendrick Lamar & SZA)
“Boo’d Up” — Larrance Dopson, Joelle James, Ella Mai & Dijon McFarlane, songwriters (Ella Mai)
“God’s Plan” — Aubrey Graham, Daveon Jackson, Brock Korsan, Ron LaTour, Matthew Samuels & Noah Shebib, songwriters (Drake)
“In My Blood” — Teddy Geiger, Scott Harris, Shawn Mendes & Geoffrey Warburton, songwriters (Shawn Mendes)
“The Joke” — Brandi Carlile, Dave Cobb, Phil Hanseroth & Tim Hanseroth, songwriters (Brandi Carlile)
“The Middle” — Sarah Aarons, Jordan K. Johnson, Stefan Johnson, Marcus Lomax, Kyle Trewartha, Michael
Trewartha & Anton Zaslavski, songwriters (Zedd, Maren Morris & Grey)
“Shallow” — Lady Gaga, Mark Ronson, Anthony Rossomando & Andrew Wyatt, songwriters (Lady Gaga & Bradley Cooper)
“This Is America” — Donald Glover & Ludwig Goransson, songwriters (Childish Gambino)

 

Record of the Year

“I Like It” — Cardi B, Bad Bunny & J Balvin
“The Joke” — Brandi Carlile
“This Is America” — Childish Gambino
“God’s Plan” — Drake
“Shallow” — Lady Gaga & Bradley Cooper
“All The Stars” — Kendrick Lamar & SZA
“Rockstar” — Post Malone Featuring 21 Savage
“The Middle” — Zedd, Maren Morris & Grey

 

Best New Artist

Chloe x Halle
Luke Combs
Greta Van Fleet
H.E.R.
Dua Lipa
Margo Price
Bebe Rexha
Jorja Smith

Edited December 7, 2018 by truthaboutluv

[UYI]

As I said in the Country Music forum:

Ashley McBryde. Brandi Carlile. Kacey Musgraves. Kelsea Ballerini. Maren Morris. Margo Price.

Country radio may not give them the attention they deserve, but at least the Grammys are! 

Brandi and Kacey are up for Album of the Year. I don't know if either of them are considered favorites for that category, but even with Chris Stapleton's nod, Kacey HAS to be the frontrunner for Best Country Album. 

[galaxygirl76]

I think I'm getting too old for the Grammy's, I recognize about a handful of the nominated names.

[UYI]

YAY a Dolly tribute at the Grammys this Sunday!

[shoregirl]

Ugh... Why Katy Perry ..shes awful. Every one sounds great for a tribute to Dolly though

[UYI]

2 hours ago, shoregirl said:

Ugh... Why Katy Perry ..shes awful. Every one sounds great for a tribute to Dolly though

I like her...*ducks*

She performed with her at the ACMs in 2016, and she's also close with Kacey Musgraves, who is also a part of the tribute. Dolly herself is performing, too; she'll be performing one of her songs from her Netflix show Dumplin'. 

[ancslove]

Lady Gaga is performing again, apparently.  I'm a little surprised that she's choosing Grammys over BAFTAs this year.  They usually clash.