ry4n
7x Platinum Member
Joined: November 2014
Posts: 7,201
My Charts
Pronouns: he/him
|
Post by ry4n on Feb 16, 2017 23:34:36 GMT -5
Adele was available to stream after a certain point. But the industry was anti-streaming a year ago. I remember the executive guy going on about how streaming hurts artists on last year's show.
|
|
Caviar
Diamond Member
Queen X
Joined: October 2003
Posts: 30,890
My Charts
Pronouns: He/his
|
Post by Caviar on Feb 16, 2017 23:46:47 GMT -5
But 25 has been on streaming since at least April/May correct? That's plenty of time for consumers to listen to it.
|
|
Rican@
8x Platinum Member
[Only dry eyes, I would love on you for years]
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,972
|
Post by Rican@ on Feb 16, 2017 23:48:41 GMT -5
But again, the streaming was not immediately for Adele or Taylor's releases though? I'm trying to understand how that could have any effects into the votes.
|
|
Caviar
Diamond Member
Queen X
Joined: October 2003
Posts: 30,890
My Charts
Pronouns: He/his
|
Post by Caviar on Feb 17, 2017 0:11:05 GMT -5
Well Adele had likely sold 8 million by then.
|
|
magik
Gold Member
Joined: November 2015
Posts: 506
|
Post by magik on Feb 17, 2017 0:35:54 GMT -5
Adele was available to stream after a certain point. But the industry was anti-streaming a year ago. I remember the executive guy going on about how streaming hurts artists on last year's show. Yeah, remember Neil Portnow speech about streaming, which led up to Taylor's win?
|
|
magik
Gold Member
Joined: November 2015
Posts: 506
|
Post by magik on Feb 17, 2017 0:38:55 GMT -5
Also, this goes back to Chance The Rapper, who became the first act to win Grammys for a streaming-only album.
But Tidal is not held to high regard. That roll out got a lot of backlash.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2017 3:33:22 GMT -5
There is a group of Beyonce fans on Twitter who keep blaming the RIAA for Beyonce losing to Adele for AOTY. They think the RIAA hands out The Grammy Awards? lol Every fanbases has their idiots you know what I mean
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2017 3:35:30 GMT -5
Carlos Santana is a legend but did he just say Adele can sing sing and imply Beyonce can't? Beyonce isn't Whitney or Mariah in their prime but Beyonce can sing one note one range Adele under that proverbial table 7 out 7 days a week. Carlos how about you start sing singin before you criticize singers. Calling her a model singer is a disservice to her talents.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2017 3:59:56 GMT -5
Limited or no streaming in itself doesn't have an effect on voters - no one cares about Apple's exclusive windows, for example.. Tidal OTOH has such a negative rep, that for better or for worse it probably contributed to people holding it against Bey when it otherwise wouldn't matter. She came off as trying to use her fanbase to boost her and her hubby's latest investment and people weren't having it.
|
|
|
Post by Devil Marlena Nylund on Feb 17, 2017 7:53:19 GMT -5
Beyonce fatigue is a thing but Taylor fatigue isn't? The only Bey fatigue I have is with casual people praising the ground she walks on in order to fit in but I'd go for new Beyonce music right now over new Taylor music.
|
|
Wave.
Moderator
Look...
Positive Vibes🙏🏾❤
Joined: August 2006
Posts: 42,800
Pronouns: He/Him
Staff
|
Post by Wave. on Feb 17, 2017 8:58:52 GMT -5
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,509
|
Post by jenglisbe on Feb 17, 2017 9:19:37 GMT -5
It's entirely possible (nay, likely) for there to be multiple things that caused this year's results. In fact I actually had 11 things listed out at first (I deleted them b/c one reason jumped out at me more than others). Only two of those reasons concerned racial or genre bias. But those two things are the points that keep occurring on a regular basis, regardless of who the artist is. So this is why the conversation keeps coming back to that. Not that one should discount all the personal aspects of Bey's loss that are on the table here; all of these things are relevant and help take the edge off her loss. But choosing to entirely shift focus or 'blame' on the Beyonce-specific reasons for her loss just comes off as an attempt at distraction? Because every year it's different. Beyonce lost because she is overexposed but Kendrick lost b/c Taylor was a bigger seller and Kendrick just wasn't exposed enough...the goal posts keep changing. The goal posts change because the nominees change, and of course when you having a voting body of thousands of people there will be multiple reasons for the outcome. It's no different than a political election where you can never really say it's about one thing only. Well, you can still say it this year as Drake's album probably pulled at least a few votes from Beyonce. Did that ultimately alter the result? Probably not, but maybe if there is a year where Beyonce is literally the only R&B/hip-hop album we'd see a different result.
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,509
|
Post by jenglisbe on Feb 17, 2017 9:33:15 GMT -5
Beyonce fatigue is a thing but Taylor fatigue isn't? The only Bey fatigue I have is with casual people praising the ground she walks on in order to fit in but I'd go for new Beyonce music right now over new Taylor music. 1. I think Swift fatigue did happen at one point; notice Swift didn't win anything for Red or "Shake It Off" (0-for-7 the two years before 1989 and 1-for-10 if you include the year "WANEGBT" was eligible). 2. For better or worse, Swift is seen as more of an artist (i.e. singer/songwriter) than Beyonce. That plays well with the Grammys. 3. I don't think anyone here denies Swift being white and making commercial music is an advantage over a black artist making "urban" music. The question has been whether that is directly or indirectly about race. We've known about the committee for years. It selects the final nominees in the big 4 categories from the top 20 vote getters. It doesn't select the winners.
|
|
Caviar
Diamond Member
Queen X
Joined: October 2003
Posts: 30,890
My Charts
Pronouns: He/his
|
Post by Caviar on Feb 17, 2017 10:08:30 GMT -5
These black blogs are straight up doing the most right now. Literally making up secret committees to justify racial bias toward her. Now bey is posting pix with her mom subtly flipping the bird to the Grammys. Girl
|
|
magik
Gold Member
Joined: November 2015
Posts: 506
|
Post by magik on Feb 17, 2017 10:50:23 GMT -5
Why is a Village Person even trying it? The "secret committee" has been known about for years, and they determine the NOMINEES based on a top 15 list, not winners. Why is it so hard to believe that Adele - who sold more records and got way more airplay - got more votes than Beyoncé, whose radio airplay hasn't been the same since 2009? Of course, B. Scott would post some gossip-y untrue stuff to push an agenda. All of this goes back to my point that people only tell half-truths to push their agenda, and most of them end up looking like fools.
It's going on in this thread as well. Taylor won no awards for Red and "Speak Now" lost country album to Lady Antebellum. There was definitely a "fatigue" there until she released 1989.
Adele won fair and square. Blame the voters, but let's not make up lies or believe lies from a 1970's fad.
|
|
Ling-Ling
Diamond Member
Kill Kill Kill Kill! Die Die Die!
Joined: September 2003
Posts: 13,518
|
Post by Ling-Ling on Feb 17, 2017 12:56:57 GMT -5
Why is it so hard to believe that Adele - who sold more records and got way more airplay - got more votes than Beyoncé, whose radio airplay hasn't been the same since 2009? And even if that did answer the question as to why Adele won, you just validated what we're all complaining about. It shouldn't matter about Adele's sales and her airplay. It should be about the quality of the work. The voting body should be listening to these albums and judging them on their own merits. But let's be honest, this is an award show, which makes it political. Hype, sales, impact, campaigning, critical acclaim, likability, authenticity as an artist, whether the artist is a veteran of the industry, etc. all factor in to the equation. Not to mention, the listeners personal tastes may skew towards a certain genre or type of music. Adele's music is way safer and easier to digest than some of the other nominees. Which is why the nominations are half garbage most of the time and why the winners are often so predictable or calculated. Making this a race issue isn't just about, I'm not voting for her because she's black! It's about the inequality that a lot of Urban/R&B artists face before they even get to the Grammy's. They're not going to get the airplay that Taylor Swift or Adele get because mainstream radio doesn't touch those genre's. And because they don't get the exposure, they don't get the album sales. And let's be honest, a lot of the time, Urban music isn't viewed to be as valid as other musical genres. Beyonce is one of the biggest stars in the world, she doesn't have to worry about getting her name out there. The fact that she released the most critically acclaimed album in the category is just icing on the cake. But most Urban artists don't get that luxury, hence Kendrick Lamar getting shafted for his far superior album, Macklemore winning best rap album over numerous rap albums that were better. Kanye West not getting an album nom for MBDTF when it was the most acclaimed album of the year. The list goes on and on. Sometimes the Grammy's just happen to get it right. Sometimes they don't. I don't think they did this year. You can give me a lot of reasons as to why Adele won, but her having the best album in the category is one I simply don't believe.
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,509
|
Post by jenglisbe on Feb 17, 2017 13:18:30 GMT -5
Why is it so hard to believe that Adele - who sold more records and got way more airplay - got more votes than Beyoncé, whose radio airplay hasn't been the same since 2009? And even if that did answer the question as to why Adele won, you just validated what we're all complaining about. It shouldn't matter about Adele's sales and her airplay. It should be about the quality of the work. The voting body should be listening to these albums and judging them on their own merits. By the same token, then, Beyonce fans shouldn't be talking about the cultural impact of Lemonade since that would also be separate from listening to the album and judging it on its own merit. *I am not saying you have made that point; I don't know. I'm just saying fans can't say outside things are irrelevant for Adele but are relevant for Beyonce. The reality is that few if any people can truly separate the music from external things. At a minimum you are going to relate more or less to music based on your personal experience (i.e. you love a break-up song more when you have just gone through one). You are also going to appreciate piano-based music more if you are a piano player, as another example. You are also then going to be more likely to have heard music that is popular. Those are all just natural and are not the fault of the Grammy voting body. Not at the moment, no, but there is also a cyclical element to that. In the first half of the 00s, for instance, R&B and hip-hop dominated radio. You can also point out that country, jazz, etc don't get mainstream airplay (and haven't in our lifetime, actually) so it isn't singular to R&B and hip-hop. Having said that, the general disadvantage genre music has in the industry is something easier to address than personal bias. I think that's where the discussion should be centered more so than on Grammy voters. Why should critical acclaim necessarily equate to Grammys success? The Grammy voting body is musicians, not critics.
|
|
magik
Gold Member
Joined: November 2015
Posts: 506
|
Post by magik on Feb 17, 2017 13:26:50 GMT -5
Why is it so hard to believe that Adele - who sold more records and got way more airplay - got more votes than Beyoncé, whose radio airplay hasn't been the same since 2009? And even if that did answer the question as to why Adele won, you just validated what we're all complaining about. It shouldn't matter about Adele's sales and her airplay. It should be about the quality of the work. If that's the case, a good bit of Beyoncé's Grammys would have gone elsewhere. I don't believe every Grammy she's every won was based on the quality of the music. Her popularity has played a part in some of her wins as well. "Quality" is subjective. Who are you to tell a Grammy voter that Adele isn't "quality" just because you feel that Beyoncé is? Regardless of that, that has absolutely nothing to do with that fad talking about "secret committees" keeping black artists from winning big categories. If you believe Beyoncé deserved it more, say that and stand by that. Don't make up LIES to further your agenda.
|
|
|
Post by when the pawn... on Feb 17, 2017 13:52:56 GMT -5
Beyonce fatigue is a thing but Taylor fatigue isn't? The only Bey fatigue I have is with casual people praising the ground she walks on in order to fit in but I'd go for new Beyonce music right now over new Taylor music. 1. I think Swift fatigue did happen at one point; notice Swift didn't win anything for Red or "Shake It Off" (0-for-7 the two years before 1989 and 1-for-10 if you include the year "WANEGBT" was eligible). 2. For better or worse, Swift is seen as more of an artist (i.e. singer/songwriter) than Beyonce. That plays well with the Grammys. 3. I don't think anyone here denies Swift being white and making commercial music is an advantage over a black artist making "urban" music. The question has been whether that is directly or indirectly about race. We've known about the committee for years. It selects the final nominees in the big 4 categories from the top 20 vote getters. It doesn't select the winners. To your point #3 - if you agree that Swift has an advantage over Beyonce because she's a white artist making "white" music (whereas Beyonce is a black artist making decidedly black music), how can you question is the bias is directly about race? Music is obviously subjective but this is the 5th year in a row where a black artist put out an ambitious, challenging, important, GREAT album, had general critical consensus of being the best of the bunch, got nominated for Album of the Year, and lost to a very white album/artist (maybe you can excuse Daft Punk, given Pharrell's heavy involvement with that album). Make it 6 years in a row, considering Kanye didn't even get nominated for My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy, one of the most, if not the most, acclaimed albums of the decade. How can we say there is no racial bias when it comes to handing out the top awards? Even when you consider the black albums who have won AOTY this millenium, one is a Joni Mitchel covers album and another was posthumous with white artists singing on almost every song. That only leaves OutKast (in 2004), who only won after releasing their poppiest work yet. When black artists make music that is rooted in black art (R&B and hip hop), they lose to (sometimes/often mediocre) white artists. Black artists can't be expected to (nor would they deserve to) win every single year but when you consider that many of the most important, acclaimed, memorable, influential music this century has been produced and performed by black musicians, the Grammys track record is embarrassing.
|
|
lincroft
New Member
Joined: August 2015
Posts: 27
|
Post by lincroft on Feb 17, 2017 13:53:30 GMT -5
She didn't lose Rap/Sung Performance because of anti-urban bias. She didn't miss out on nominations for R&B Song and R&B performance because of anti-urban bias. Her last album didn't lose Urban Contemporary because of anti-urban bias. 4 wasn't overlooked to the extent that it was because of anti-urban bias.
Those who voted in those categories were just not that into her. Why is it so hard to believe that the broader mass of voters felt the same?
|
|
magik
Gold Member
Joined: November 2015
Posts: 506
|
Post by magik on Feb 17, 2017 13:58:37 GMT -5
She didn't lose Rap/Sung Performance because of anti-urban bias. She didn't miss out on nominations for R&B Song and R&B performance because of anti-urban bias. Her last album didn't lose Urban Contemporary because of anti-urban bias. 4 wasn't overlooked to the extent that it was because of anti-urban bias. Those who voted in those categories were just not that into her. Why is it so hard to believe that the broader mass of voters felt the same? Right. I feel the racial/genre debate was more realistic in those other artists' cases. But Beyoncé's showing in genre fields is more about not recognizing her than not recognizing black artists. There's Beyoncé fatigue, but no one wants to admit it.
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,509
|
Post by jenglisbe on Feb 17, 2017 14:10:17 GMT -5
1. I think Swift fatigue did happen at one point; notice Swift didn't win anything for Red or "Shake It Off" (0-for-7 the two years before 1989 and 1-for-10 if you include the year "WANEGBT" was eligible). 2. For better or worse, Swift is seen as more of an artist (i.e. singer/songwriter) than Beyonce. That plays well with the Grammys. 3. I don't think anyone here denies Swift being white and making commercial music is an advantage over a black artist making "urban" music. The question has been whether that is directly or indirectly about race. We've known about the committee for years. It selects the final nominees in the big 4 categories from the top 20 vote getters. It doesn't select the winners. To your point #3 - if you agree that Swift has an advantage over Beyonce because she's a white artist making "white" music (whereas Beyonce is a black artist making decidedly black music), how can you question is the bias is directly about race? I see it as being indirectly about race. As I've said in this thread numerous times, the majority of NARAS are recording musicians. As such they appreciate singer/songwriters and also music that isn't overly produced (i.e. if someone uses studio tricks in place of actual musicians, it puts musicians out of jobs). Hip-hop music is production-driven (i.e. about the beat and rarely uses live instruments) and as such isn't as naturally appealing to musicians. To me it's thus about the style of music more than the race of the people recording the music. I'm not sure how to explain my opinion in a different way.
|
|
magik
Gold Member
Joined: November 2015
Posts: 506
|
Post by magik on Feb 17, 2017 14:17:00 GMT -5
Even though Lauryn's win was last century, what made her more relatable to voters compared to Beyoncé and Lemonade?
I wonder if it's because Lauryn Hill was viewed more as a songwriter and musician + had a huge #1 hit.
|
|
Ling-Ling
Diamond Member
Kill Kill Kill Kill! Die Die Die!
Joined: September 2003
Posts: 13,518
|
Post by Ling-Ling on Feb 17, 2017 14:35:39 GMT -5
Why should critical acclaim necessarily equate to Grammys success? The Grammy voting body is musicians, not critics. Because critical acclaim is one of the (if not the) biggest barometers in ANY industry to measure the quality of it's art. And it's written by the musical press, which is very tied to the music industry. It's why they've given early copies of albums to music critics since the very beginning. It's why record labels use it in advertising and campaigning. It's a factor and always has been. If that's the case, a good bit of Beyoncé's Grammys would have gone elsewhere. I don't believe every Grammy she's every won was based on the quality of the music. Her popularity has played a part in some of her wins as well. "Quality" is subjective. Who are you to tell a Grammy voter that Adele isn't "quality" just because you feel that Beyoncé is? ...If you believe Beyoncé deserved it more, say that and stand by that... Tons of artists have awards that are downright laughable and they certainly didn't win based on merit. In complete agreement. I die every time someone wins for a live version of one of their old songs. And I do think Adele is quality. Adele is amazing. And like you said, quality is subjective. But I do expect voting artists and peers to be able to step outside of all the bullshit I mentioned in my previous post and listen to music from a place of critique and openmindedness. The same way I do and a lot of us here do. I can't look at a ton of the Grammy past winners and believe for a second they do. And sure, I'll flat out say Lemonade was a better album, with no hesitancy. And clearly a ton of the music press agrees, hell EVEN ADELE AGREES. Hence the hullabaloo that this has created. Award shows in general are incredibly flawed, even within the rules they create for themselves. I think those flaws predominantly effect genre musicians and people of color. This is way bigger than just this year and it applies to every award show out there. It's very easy to cry RACIST, but I think that overlooks the subtleties of why it happens. But I think biases toward black art do exist (jenglisbe just made an amazing point in his last post). And if there really is "Beyonce fatigue", that's just another factor of bullsh*t put into the equation that should have no relevance.
|
|
|
Post by when the pawn... on Feb 17, 2017 14:36:12 GMT -5
To your point #3 - if you agree that Swift has an advantage over Beyonce because she's a white artist making "white" music (whereas Beyonce is a black artist making decidedly black music), how can you question is the bias is directly about race? I see it as being indirectly about race. As I've said in this thread numerous times, the majority of NARAS are recording musicians. As such they appreciate singer/songwriters and also music that isn't overly produced (i.e. if someone uses studio tricks in place of actual musicians, it puts musicians out of jobs). Hip-hop music is production-driven (i.e. about the beat and rarely uses live instruments) and as such isn't as naturally appealing to musicians. To me it's thus about the style of music more than the race of the people recording the music. I'm not sure how to explain my opinion in a different way. That makes sense, I understand your line of thinking. I just think there's racism embedded in the idea that black artists will struggle to win top awards if they continue to make music in a mostly black way (though that isn't my most eloquent turn of phrase). Also if rap isn't viewed as "art" in the same way as traditional musicianship, I think that is racist. I understand why studio musicians are hesitant and I can't blame people individually but I am of the opinion that the Grammys, or the general field in particular, is plagued with racism. I think there should be some sort of re-structuring and it's not ONLY about race. Quality, inventiveness, etc. should be valued as much as, if not more than, success on the Hot 100.
|
|
Ling-Ling
Diamond Member
Kill Kill Kill Kill! Die Die Die!
Joined: September 2003
Posts: 13,518
|
Post by Ling-Ling on Feb 17, 2017 14:44:24 GMT -5
Even though Lauryn's win was last century, what made her more relatable to voters compared to Beyoncé and Lemonade? I wonder if it's because Lauryn Hill was viewed more as a songwriter and musician + had a huge #1 hit. Lauryn Hill was basically the Adele of that year. Massive critical acclaim, big album sales, hit singles, over the top hype. And yeah, she rapped, but she also had very classic R&B on that record that was far more digestable than some of Lemonade. The music was also very organic. She was viewed as basically the creator and creative mind of that entire album (although she got her ass sued later on down the line for those credits). Not to mention it was just a killer f**king album. She was viewed as an artist and singer, rather than a performer. It was kind of a perfect storm.
|
|
magik
Gold Member
Joined: November 2015
Posts: 506
|
Post by magik on Feb 17, 2017 14:47:44 GMT -5
Why should critical acclaim necessarily equate to Grammys success? The Grammy voting body is musicians, not critics. Because critical acclaim is one of the (if not the) biggest barometers in ANY industry to measure the quality of it's art. And it's written by the musical press, which is very tied to the music industry. It's why they've given early copies of albums to music critics since the very beginning. It's why record labels use it in advertising and campaigning. It's a factor and always has been. If that's the case, a good bit of Beyoncé's Grammys would have gone elsewhere. I don't believe every Grammy she's every won was based on the quality of the music. Her popularity has played a part in some of her wins as well. "Quality" is subjective. Who are you to tell a Grammy voter that Adele isn't "quality" just because you feel that Beyoncé is? ...If you believe Beyoncé deserved it more, say that and stand by that... Tons of artists have awards that are downright laughable and they certainly didn't win based on merit. In complete agreement. I die every time someone wins for a live version of one of their old songs. And I do think Adele is quality. Adele is amazing. And like you said, quality is subjective. But I do expect voting artists and peers to be able to step outside of all the bulls**t I mentioned in my previous post and listen to music from a place of critique and openmindedness. The same way I do and a lot of us here do. I can't look at a ton of the Grammy past winners and believe for a second they do. And sure, I'll flat out say Lemonade was a better album, with no hesitancy. And clearly a ton of the music press agrees, hell EVEN ADELE AGREES. Hence the hullabaloo that this has created. Award shows in general are incredibly flawed, even within the rules they create for themselves. I think those flaws predominantly effect genre musicians and people of color. This is way bigger than just this year and it applies to every award show out there. It's very easy to cry RACIST, but I think that overlooks the subtleties of why it happens. But I think biases toward black art do exist (jenglisbe just made an amazing point in his last post). And if there really is "Beyonce fatigue", that's just another factor of bullsh*t put into the equation that should have no relevance. Adele is also a proven BeyHive member, so her love for Beyoncé and Lemonade may be legitimate. But one might argue "white guilt". Not to mention, it was the media that tried to sell the Adele vs. Beyoncé narrative, so it's probably Adele's way of saying that there is no beef, only love. But that's neither here nor there. Just because a bunch of music press agrees doesn't mean a person saying that they prefer 25 over Lemonade is wrong. There are actually plenty people who prefer Adele's music to Beyoncé's, hence why she sells more. But expecting the Grammys to always dismiss outside factors is asking too much of them. They're people, like us, with biases, tastes and preferences like everyone else. Sometimes it benefits certain artists, sometimes it doesn't. But there is no way to really say if it's racism or "fatigue." We can only go by patterns or other factors.
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,509
|
Post by jenglisbe on Feb 17, 2017 14:56:08 GMT -5
Why should critical acclaim necessarily equate to Grammys success? The Grammy voting body is musicians, not critics. Because critical acclaim is one of the (if not the) biggest barometers in ANY industry to measure the quality of it's art. And it's written by the musical press, which is very tied to the music industry. It's why they've given early copies of albums to music critics since the very beginning. It's why record labels use it in advertising and campaigning. It's a factor and always has been. Albums are given to critics early for promotional purposes; so people know an album is out and, hopefully, hear something positive about it. If the Grammys, Oscars, Emmys, etc were about critical favorites, then critics would be allowed to vote for them. They are not, unless they are active in that field.
|
|
Ling-Ling
Diamond Member
Kill Kill Kill Kill! Die Die Die!
Joined: September 2003
Posts: 13,518
|
Post by Ling-Ling on Feb 17, 2017 14:56:21 GMT -5
Adele is also a proven BeyHive member, so her love for Beyoncé and Lemonade may be legitimate. But one might argue "white guilt". Not to mention, it was the media that tried to sell the Adele vs. Beyoncé narrative, so it's probably Adele's way of saying that there is no beef, only love. But that's neither here nor there. Just because a bunch of music press agrees doesn't mean a person saying that they prefer 25 over Lemonade is wrong. There are actually plenty people who prefer Adele's music to Beyoncé's, hence why she sells more. But expecting the Grammys to always dismiss outside factors is asking too much of them. They're people, like us, with biases, tastes and preferences like everyone else. Sometimes it benefits certain artists, sometimes it doesn't. But there is no way to really say if it's racism or "fatigue." We can only go by patterns or other factors. I've always considered Adele to be pretty genuine and from the hip. If it was just the gushing award speech, I'd be suspicious. But that post stage interview sealed it for me, I think she explained her point of view very well and very honestly. And maybe you're right, maybe I'm being pie in the sky? Maybe it's because I'm an arts major and try my damnedest to approach any form of art with an open mind (well, even I have my limits, sorry death metal). And why the hell do I even get upset about it still? This has always happened and probably won't ever change. I believe that's textbook definition of insanity.
|
|
magik
Gold Member
Joined: November 2015
Posts: 506
|
Post by magik on Feb 17, 2017 14:58:18 GMT -5
Even though Lauryn's win was last century, what made her more relatable to voters compared to Beyoncé and Lemonade? I wonder if it's because Lauryn Hill was viewed more as a songwriter and musician + had a huge #1 hit. Lauryn Hill was basically the Adele of that year. Massive critical acclaim, big album sales, hit singles, over the top hype. And yeah, she rapped, but she also had very classic R&B on that record that was far more digestable than some of Lemonade. The music was also very organic. She was viewed as basically the creator and creative mind of that entire album (although she got her ass sued later on down the line for those credits). Not to mention it was just a killer f**king album. She was viewed as an artist and singer, rather than a performer. It was kind of a perfect storm. You would think at this point that Beyoncé is more in that lane. This is the same woman that won SOTY and has 21 other Grammys. In Beyoncé's case, I think people are over the "Beyoncé is QUEEN" thing. The-Dream made perfect sense when he talked about her current support in the R&B field. The fact that they were trying to push Self-Titled and "Drunk in Love" as pop was a joke.
|
|