Grammys Slash Categories, Rock and Metal Get Screwed
Thursday, April 7, 2011 at 12:01AM Officials behind the Grammy awards are cutting more than 30 award categories. This means there will now be 78 little gold statues awarded to musicians instead of 109.
I must either be 1) really jaded or 2) really smart because I knew as soon as I started reading about the Grammy cuts, I knew rock, metal and hard rock was screwed. I was right.
"In the rock field, the Best Rock Instrumental Performance and Best Rock Performance by a Duo or Group with Vocals will go away, while the Best Hard Rock and Best Metal Performance awards will be consolidated into one trophy."
So, shock of shocks, right?
So now, everyone from Incubus and Aerosmith to Green Day and Exhorder will be head to head. Same situation with Sting against someone like...I dunno... Nickelback or Mayhem. Yeah, that makes sense. Might as well shove death metal up against more mainstream rock acts. Or legacy acts. That seems fair.
I can't disagree that there were way too many Grammy categories. I think the idea to streamline the pop categories as gender neutral (no separate award for male/female) is good. I don't think it's great to just start smashing a bunch of stuff together that deserves awards. I feel like rock is important enough to deserve a stand alone Grammy. Same for metal. I don't like gospel music but I think that genre is important enough to deserve its own award too...and this new slice n' dice plan changes that genre as well.
Back to MTV:
"Similar changes were made in the country, jazz, gospel, Latin, American roots, world and classical genres, while Best Native American, Zydeco or Cajun and Hawaiian will compete in a larger field under Best Regional Roots Music Album."
These changes will go into effect during next year's Grammy awards telecast.
So, what do you think of these changes? Do you agree with me that rock and metal are getting the shaft?
Reader Comments (13)
Well, I really think that rock and metal got screwed but its the Grammy's so yeah, saw that one coming from half the world away. (no really!!)
However I will add, that don't a lot of people disregard the Grammy's as a pointless popularity contest anyway? It would be funny to see Judas Priest, John Mayer,Korn, and Behemoth on the same stage though.lol
Honestly, I don't care what the Grammies do anymore.
Forget Jethro Tull 20-odd years ago. That was a howler, but the true irrelevance of the Grammies is shown in somewhat more subtle ways every single year. In the current shakedown, they're presented (hypothetically) with 2 options: a streamlined, limited set of awards that bashes a lot of potentially different genres together into the same pools, or a proliferation of ever more atomized sub-sub-genres that mean less than nothing to the small number of aficionados each one has. That's a dog's breakfast, but at least they chose.
Now I can go on and continue to ignore them completely, like I always did before. I mean really, does anyone get a frisson of expectation when an artist they've never heard before is described as "Grammy-winning"?
Jeff Beck won best Rock Instrumental this year for "Hammerhead" from his latest album, "Emotion & Commotion". A guitar legend such as he should be honored for such an incredible performance.
The Grammys losing this category is preposterous!
OTSK! Shadow, live from Greece, no less, makes a clever observation regarding the unintended comical consequences of combining categories. Think of Metallica competing against John Mayer.
Unfortunately, Grammy voting members will award a Grammy to lightweights like John Mayer before they give one to Metallica.
That really is a death nell for Heavy Metal as it will not be properly recognized in upcoming Grammy presentations as Heavy Metal artists will always be overlooked in favor of John Mayer types.
I think the category will be restored once they realize how they've slighted the genre.
It could happen sooner than we think, with the category coming back in 2013. But it could also be delayed until enuff voting members have kicked off to finally realign voting to be more in tune, pun intended, with all that should be considered once again as valid, important and relevant in popular music.
I sure hope the category is added back in. I think they got rid of it for the TV cameras, worried that people tune out during the Metal performance.
One can only pray Heavy Metal will get it's due. But for now, you really have to wonder if they are intentionally burying the genre alive, which is crazy, considering there are certainly more people buying Metal than some of the other category winners at this year's Grammys.
Until they lumped 'em all into this new category, bands like Them Crooked Vultures were mistaken for Heavy Metal and won that category.
This is proof of how clueless the voting body of The Grammys really is. They have absolutely no understanding or appreciation for what Heavy Metal is. They are unjustly burying it alive.
No offense to bandmembers John Paul Jones, Dave Grohl, etc., regardless of your pedigrees, you ain't Metal!
I don't look to the Grammies to provide recognition for any of the acts I like in any genre. You're better off cruising the Top 10 lists of music bloggers in December and January for that.
But I did want to point out that despite the embarrassment of that first metal Grammy in the late 80's, Metallica did, in fact, win several of the next metal Grammies in the following years. Perhaps making up for the initial Tull debacle??
I don't even like Metallica, except for some of "Master Of Puppets" and "Ride The Lightening". And the last person I want to see getting any kind of recognition is Lars Ulrich, who is the biggest weenis I've ever seen, having witnessed him being one personally on the streets of NYC one night).
And I like Jethro Tull more than Metallica. "Aqualung" is better than anything Metallica has ever done.
However, you guys are right here. It was robbery when they gave The Grammy to Tull way back when because, at that time, Metallica's work that was nominated that year was better and much more relevant than the stuff Tull was nominated for.
One thing I learned a long time ago, in a kind of epiphany that I've spoken about here before...
I DON'T HAVE TO LIKE SOMETHING TO KNOW WHETHER IT'S GOOD OR NOT.
Though Metallica is generally not my cup of tea, and I absolutely cannot stand Ulrich, there's no denying their work is good, even great, and they did't deserve it when they got screwed and they deserved it when they finally won.
Now, M is right... Right now, the current Metallica duz not deserve a Grammy if they brought the Metal Category back, but I wouldn't count 'em out completely. Who knows, by the time The Grammys bring back the Metal Category, if they ever do, Metallica just might have a comeback. They certainly have the chops, the talent, the potential inspiration and the dedication to create quality albums.
Metallica may miss the boat sometimes, especially recently, but no one can accuse 'em of mailing anything in. They seem like they always put their all into making a record, even if they have fallen short. No matter what, when push comes to shove, Metallica still seem to knock themselves out.
As for The Grammys, I like watching it from start to finish. Yeah, it's commercial. Yeah, they often pick the wrong stuff to win. But I love all kinds of music and it's amazing to watch all these fantastic performers do their thing and the production that goes into it.
And what about the end of the last one? Though the band that won the big one is certainly not my cup of tea, you cannot say that crap is commercial.
I'm still just trying to figure out how they won, since I personally wouldn't call their stuff music.
I'm not even bothering to Google to find out their name. I already forgot who they are, nor do I care to find that out.
I am curious, however, to see how it all plays out next year.