Lefsetz on the Grammys

[Anderton]

(copyright 2010 by Robert Scott Lefsetz)

 

There was an interesting piece in the "New York Times" asking whether it was more important to win a Grammy or appear on the telecast. In other words, do you remember who won Album of the Year or do you remember Pink flying high in the sky? (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/29/arts/music/29grammys.html)

 

For those expressing displeasure with the Grammy telecast, I remind you that we no longer live in a monoculture. It was a very brief period, two decades at most, when mainstream and alternative merged, when MTV dictated the hits and radio fell in line behind. But now, you get to choose what you want to listen to from a plethora of choices. So if you tune in a telecast like this you're dumbfounded. Who are these people? Does anybody really care?

 

Beyonce prancing. Black Eyed Peas marching. Eminem and two guys you've never heard of ranting. Is this music? What kind of hole have we fallen down?

 

Relax. To say the Grammys are a reflection of music today is akin to saying what airs on NBC defines America. It doesn't. People have more passion for niche channels like Discovery than those trying to appeal to everybody networks.

 

But there's a limited channel universe. And the networks bought up the niche channels. What's going on in the music business?

 

Chaos.

 

What's ironic is that NARAS was the ultimate niche operation. What I mean by this was there was a category for every genre, it delved deep into music some were passionate about, but few cared about, which is exactly what's happening today. But the TV show is the opposite of this. With fewer awards given and only the most mainstream acts featured. Now is the time for NARAS to flourish. But beholden to the old major label structure that is crumbling, NARAS is teetering too. Overspending while membership is declining. Isn't this like trying to get people to buy albums on CD when you can cherry-pick the desirable singles on Napster?

 

But leading would require vision. And NARAS has none.

 

But who gives a {censored} about NARAS anyway.

 

I'll say that I was impressed with the Michael Jackson tribute. No, not his kids, who certainly aren't his biologically, and acquitted themselves quite well, but the performances... Everybody could sing! Could almost make you a Celine Dion fan. Especially after experiencing Taylor Swift.

 

How awful was she?

 

Dreadful.

 

"Fearless" deserved to win Album of the Year. I was glad it did. Scuttlebutt was it was DMB's year, but to say "GrooGrux" is good is to be a tie-dyed hippie hanging out in the parking lot before a show that features great playing but mediocre material. "GrooGrux" sold to a small coterie, most people don't care.

 

But Taylor Swift is as mainstream as you can get. Triumphing in two formats. Speaking her truth to her audience. I love "Fearless". You can play it from start to finish, again and again, it's honest. But last night's performance...

 

Do you remember Billy Squier's pink video? Which killed his career overnight? Take a peek:

What was a hard rocker doing prancing around in a pink tank top? What was a neophyte artist doing sharing a stage with a legend who made it before auto-tune, before studio tricks could make anybody a singer?

 

I don't need to analyze the performance. (Hell, what I don't get is how Taylor rearranged her own hit song.) But what I am interested in is the impact. Because now, everybody knows that Taylor Swift can't sing. Is this what they'll remember?

 

Now unlike Billy Squier's pink video, there won't be endless repetition on MTV. And one can question how much of the target audience saw this performance. But the cognoscenti did, and to what degree do they now want to distance themselves from Ms. Swift?

 

In other words, did Taylor Swift kill her career overnight?

 

I'll argue she did. Oh, I'm not fully convinced of that, but let's start from this position.

 

She'll be even further hated in Nashville (and what kind of {censored}ed up world do we live in where the CMAs are better than the Grammys?) I'd love to say whored out Top Forty radio stations will ignore her, but this is doubtful, still...

 

In one fell swoop, Taylor Swift consigned herself to the dustbin of teen phenoms. Who we expect to burn brightly and then fade away. From New Kids On The Block to Backstreet Boys to Miley Cyrus. A wall is created, stating you can't come any further. Debbie Gibson can appear in shows on Broadway, but she can't have a hit record, the powers-that-be won't let it happen.

 

Taylor's too young and dumb to understand the mistake she made. And those surrounding her are addicted to cash and are afraid to tell her no. But last night Taylor Swift SHOULD have auto-tuned. To save her career.

 

They say it's easy to fake it in the twenty first century.

 

But one thing we know is the truth will always come out.

 

It's hard to be a singer if you can't sing.

 

Ultimately, we want our stars to be genuine. Without this credibility, your time atop the charts is brief.

 

Taylor Swift shortened her career last night. And since she says she calls all her own shots, she has to shoulder the blame. Yes, her dream came true, she made it, she's a star, but the real test is longevity. Elton John can play with GaGa decades later. Will Taylor Swift be duetting with the stars of the 2030s? Doubtful.

 

 

--

Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/

--

http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz

--

If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,

http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1

[CalfeeJones]

Here's the videos and the story about the arrangement change. Apparently she went to an arrangement from a viral video. Both videos are on this page.

 

http://mashable.com/2010/02/01/taylor-swift-viral-cover/

[Geoff Grace]

I'm still of the mind that the Grammy awards should be more like the Oscars. Here's the case I made back in 2007:

 

 

I'm going to start by saying something nice and then I'm going to take it back (well, sort of). It's great to see live music on television. There's so little of it these days -- on TV or off. I particularly enjoyed the Police and Christina Aguilera, but it was good to see many of the other acts perform live as well. However... I hate that the Recording Academy can't seem to make up its mind whether the Grammy Awards is a concert or an awards show; and because it tries to be both, it does neither particularly well. I've always felt that the Grammy Awards should be more like the Oscars. You won't see Alan Arkin and Steve Carell reenacting a scene from Little Miss Sunshine live on this year's Oscar Awards, nor would many people want them to. Don't get me wrong -- I love live theater, but the Oscar Awards are about the movies and the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences gets that. Similarly, it's the Recording Academy, not the Performing Academy, that puts on the Grammy Awards. It's time to take a tip from the Oscars and put the glamor and prestige back into the art of recording. At the Oscars, serious films take center stage. Entertaining action films and comedies generally make more money and would otherwise get more attention, so why does the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences choose to honor serious films that might otherwise barely make a blip on the RADAR? It does it because those films need attention, and they stand a chance to break even or make a profit once they've been showered with awards. Why doesn't the Recording Academy do this with its more serious forms of music? Other than the child prodigies who got their 15 minutes of fame tonight, no jazz or classical music was featured nor was any other genre that might have had higher aspirations than simple entertainment. Once a year, this is the industry's best shot at raising the bar and expanding the public's awareness of variety in music. The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences does a great job at this. Why doesn't the Recording Academy? Last but not least is the shaft given to lifetime award honorees who -- instead of getting a featured speech like Oscar lifetime winners -- must simply nod and wave at the camera for a second or two before they are dismissed. If there was less live music at the Grammies, we might have a chance to hear a few words from the greats who shaped the industry and art of music. So here's my suggestion: Don't get rid of the live music; have instead a Grammy Awards concert on an earlier night to help build up to and hype the Grammy Awards. Then, make the Grammy Awards more like the Oscar Awards by honoring the best and brightest -- not the most popular -- and by letting lifetime winners speak. Just my two, shiny copper Lincolns.

 

Best,

 

Geoff

[MikeRivers]

I didn't watch the Grammys, nor have I bothered with NARAS membership since they dropped the cheap LPs and later CDs to members (presumably so we could hear artists to nominate).

 

To me, the important thing is not to win a Grammy, but to be nominated. At least that means that someone who cares about your music thought it was worthy of recognition. While it's been a while since anyone in the Traditional Folk category has been either, it's nice to see Tejano bands and African bands, and Bluegrass bands being recognized.

[blue2blue]

Mention of the Black Eyed Peas always seems to make me sad these days. I loved those guys back... you know... before they sold their souls to the Auto-Tune devil. Maybe they didn't have much street cred but they could write a hook and some of there stuff is actually terrific songwriting, at least from my perspective. I love "Shut Up." It's a real little movie of a song. And it's funny as hell. And it's a sing along. (Who can resist the call-response "Shut up... just shut up shut up!")

 

Uh... were was I?

 

Oh, yeah, the Grammys. Are they still doing those?

[js1]

Didn't see Taylor Swift's performance on last night's Grammys. Didn't want to, because I saw her performance on last year's Grammys, where she showed me that she couldn't sing.

 

That didn't kill her career then. Maybe (hopefully) this one will. I don't bear her any ill personally, as she seems like a nice kid. But...

 

I've seen a shift over the last few months, where all of a sudden, it's important, and a badge of honor to sing live again. Hallelujah.

 

The opening performances of the Grammys I did see. In general, I was pleasantly surprised. Elton/Gaga, Green Day and Beyonce all did a good job. They all played like they had something to prove, and that live performance still matters.

 

js

[blue2blue]

I don't think it'll kill her career but it'll give the kids a taste of what she sounds like without A-T. That's for sure.

 

Check it out... there are three songs here but things don't really get fun until the second one (cut to 2'15" or so if you want) when Steve Nicks comes out to do a duet on "Rhiannon."

 

I sort of resent rich, talentless girls whose pathway to stardom is bought and paid for, but I have to say, her performance is so disastro that I actually felt sorry for her... it's just painful to watch.

 

By the way, I have no idea why this vid is still up -- NARAS cut a broad swathe across YouTube doing the Sherman-to-the-sea thing, killing Grammy content vid after vid.

 

Q_02gXXL2to

[Anderton]

Are you sure it wasn't an issue with the in-ear monitors? People just aren't that bad naturally. Once on stage the monitors dropped out, and I couldn't hear myself sing. I knew that it sucked, so I just mouthed the words, as if the mic went out, to save myself further embarrassment.

 

It seems Swift's vocals were far better on the last cut, as if someone said "oh crap, the faders are down on Taylor's monitors! Quick, turn 'em up!!"

[Jotown]

Are you sure it wasn't an issue with the in-ear monitors? People just aren't that bad naturally. It seems Swift's vocals were far better on the last cut, as if someone said "oh crap, the faders are down on Taylor's monitors! Quick, turn 'em up!!"

Well actually lots and lots of people are that bad naturally.

 

I have nothing against Taylor Swift, but I have heard her in three separate performances (Grammy, SNL, and a sporting event) in which her voice was not tuned. In all three she sounded pretty much like the Grammy performance, so I think it is pretty clear that she is no Celine Dion when it comes to her voice.

 

On the other hand (and this is where I disagree with Lefsetz) I don't think it matters that much to her fans, and most people in general.

 

I think it is pretty clear that as a culture we have turned the corner on this "Autotune" thing. Those who care about it (like musicans and singers and artists who believe that talent matters) are not really relevant to the music business anymore. And those who don't care (the vast majority of consumers and most young people) don't really care what we think about it. It is a lot like file sharing in that respect.

 

Now there may be some kind of "Autotune" backlash in the future; but I think that the average person has voted and the majority of them don't care. Part of it is a generational thing, and part of it is the continuing decline in cultural importance that music has undergone in this generation. Now I am not saying this is a good thing - because I clearly think it is not - but it is what it is.

 

A wise man (or woman) once said; Know the truth and the truth will set you free.

[Synonym Music]

 

Are you sure it wasn't an issue with the in-ear monitors? People just aren't that bad naturally. Once on stage the monitors dropped out, and I couldn't hear myself sing. I knew that it sucked, so I just mouthed the words, as if the mic went out, to save myself further embarrassment. It seems Swift's vocals were far better on the last cut, as if someone said "oh crap, the faders are down on Taylor's monitors! Quick, turn 'em up!!"

 

I would challenge you to find a good performance of her live.

[Ara Ajizian]

 

I think it is pretty clear that as a culture we have turned the corner on this "Autotune" thing. Those who care about it (like musicans and singers and artists who believe that talent matters) are not really relevant to the music business anymore.

 

 

And this is why the music business itself becomes less and less relevant by the day (thank God).

[Anderton]

 

I would challenge you to find a good performance of her live.

 

 

That bad, eh? Oh well. I was trying to give her the benefit of the doubt, but I guess there's not much doubt...

[Anderton]

On the other hand, regarding her vocals, she DOES have very pretty curly blond hair.

[UstadKhanAli]

On the other hand, regarding her vocals, she DOES have very pretty curly blond hair.

 

 

OTOH, she DOES seem like a nice person.

[UstadKhanAli]

I realize this will make me look insanely uncool - again - but whatever, I just speak my mind. I liked the Pink Cirque du Soleil-like performance. The song? I don't remember it really, but I thought the performance was quite beautiful and memorable. Figgered I'd check in and say something positive about the show.

[blue2blue]

 

Are you sure it wasn't an issue with the in-ear monitors? People just aren't that bad naturally. Once on stage the monitors dropped out, and I couldn't hear myself sing. I knew that it sucked, so I just mouthed the words, as if the mic went out, to save myself further embarrassment. It seems Swift's vocals were far better on the last cut, as if someone said "oh crap, the faders are down on Taylor's monitors! Quick, turn 'em up!!"

Monitoring issues did come to mind. However no one else seemed to be having problems, not Taylor's guide vocalist (hidden back in the shadows on the first song) or even Stevie, who genuinely seemed more than a big taken aback, not Taylor's protoge or whatever he is, who joined them for the third song.

 

BTW, here's a much higher quality vid of the songs:

 

AGaol2jsdgI

[Mudcat007]

Wow - that was a lot worse than I expected.

 

Having said that, her songs on the radio are pretty decent pop recordings.

 

She appears to be pretty talented as a songwriter.

 

She comes across well in the acting I've seen her do on TV.

 

She was funny on SNL.

 

She appears to have a sense of humour about herself as exemplified in the rap song/video she did.

 

She handled that whole Kanye thing with some grace & humour.

 

She seems to be a really nice person.

 

She just needs some vocal lessons to improve her support and intonation.

 

She probably has enough money to be able to afford them.

[blue2blue]

You forgot one:

 

She is someone who manifestly cannot find or hold pitch in live performance yet who was awarded a Grammy for Best Female Country Vocal Performance.

 

And that is one sentence that speaks volumes about the music business today.

[Lee Knight]

Taylor's got zero breath support. I don't understand why they don't have that girl in nonstop training and lessons with a great instructor/coach. I still think she's got a lot to offer. She needs to get good.

 

She's got a lot, other singers don't have. A sound that works for a lot of people. A likable sound. She just has lungs the size of walnuts and doesn't seem intent on fixing that. Gotta grab a lot of air and push girl!

 

Get good or get gone.

[blue2blue]

 

Taylor's got zero breath support. I don't understand why they don't have that girl in nonstop training and lessons with a great instructor/coach. I still think she's got a lot to offer. She needs to get good. She's got a lot, other singers don't have. A sound that works for a lot of people. A likable sound. She just has lungs the size of walnuts and doesn't seem intent on fixing that. Gotta grab a lot of air and push girl! Get good or get gone.

They're too busy raking in the cash.

 

Why fix what ain't -- in the minds of her handlers and the label -- broke?

 

This is working fine.

 

She just got three Grammys, including best Country Female Vocalist.

 

 

She's at the peak of her industry!

 

 

What's wrong with you guys?

 

Er... us guys?

[Lee Knight]

 

You forgot one: She is someone who manifestly cannot find or hold pitch in live performance yet who was awarded a Grammy for Best Female Country Vocal Performance . And that is one sentence that speaks volumes about the music business today.

 

 

I does. You right... well... it says something about the Grammys more though, huh? I mean , that's silly. She clearly did not release the Best Female Country Vocal. And Jethro Tull wasn't the best "Heavy Metal" band some years back.

 

I believe in Taylor's case, she's not hated by Nashville, she's looked at as a Saviour. Please get us number like Garth again. Please.

 

But like I said, if I'd met her and heard her stuff and her weak voice... I'd think, she could be great. She's not. But she could be. And she should be. But she's not.

[blue2blue]

Well, maybe after her 15 minutes is over, she can have a chance to go to a Greek island for a couple years (she ought to be able to buy a nice one) and put in some quality woodshedding...

 

[Jotown]

 

And this is why the music business itself becomes less and less relevant by the day (thank God).

Well actually, the major label driven music business is more relevant than ever. If you just look at a list of who was on the Grammies and who won a Grammy, it is clear that only those that have major label, and or ancillary corporate, support are going to be relevant to the listening public.

 

No matter how great an artist is; if nobody hears them and they are shut out from the major events in which music is promoted and pop culture is defined they are by definition irrelevant.

[Cry Logic]

 

"....I think it is pretty clear that as a culture we have turned the corner on this "Autotune" thing...."

 

 

Ordinary people actually like Autotune as an effect.

I'm talking about "over the top obvious" Black Eyed Peas/T-Pain type autotune.

My wife likes it and she's a mid 50's baby boomer who grew up on Joni Mitchell etc etc!

 

She's asked me a couple of times "What is that effect?" or "How do they get that effect?"

 

That's the thing a lot of the anti-autotune brigade seem to miss.

People like it ...

It's perceived as a futuristic, modern, sci-fi type of effect.

Just like like phasing, chorus, echo or reverb were back in the day.

 

What's fascinating to me is how it elicits a similar reaction as distortion

did for my parents generation!

 

Fear, loathing and hatred!

[Synonym Music]

Well actually lots and lots of people are that bad naturally. I have nothing against Taylor Swift, but I have heard her in three separate performances (Grammy, SNL, and a sporting event) in which her voice was not tuned. In all three she sounded pretty much like the Grammy performance, so I think it is pretty clear that she is no Celine Dion when it comes to her voice. On the other hand (and this is where I disagree with Lefsetz) I don't think it matters that much to her fans, and most people in general. I think it is pretty clear that as a culture we have turned the corner on this "Autotune" thing. Those who care about it (like musicans and singers and artists who believe that talent matters) are not really relevant to the music business anymore. And those who don't care (the vast majority of consumers and most young people) don't really care what we think about it. It is a lot like file sharing in that respect. Now there may be some kind of "Autotune" backlash in the future; but I think that the average person has voted and the majority of them don't care. Part of it is a generational thing, and part of it is the continuing decline in cultural importance that music has undergone in this generation. Now I am not saying this is a good thing - because I clearly think it is not - but it is what it is. A wise man (or woman) once said; Know the truth and the truth will set you free.

+10000

 

Extremely well said. And some people get shockingly defensive when you de-cry overzealous autotune. You're harshing their buzz, man! Who died and made you the arbiter of taste?! Why so snobby???

 

I think once I heard Carmen at the Houston Grand Opera ten years back, it cemented what I thought real performances and performers were. There was absolutely no faking it.