The Grammys: a pitiful show.

[Max Ventura]

last night I watched the Grammys for the first time, and I expected to see a super-produced mega-show, technically worthy of the enormous budget that probably has been vomited into it, but instead I observed a badly sewn-together, rough-running, almost amateurish display of lack of experience in TV production.

As a former TV and roadshow tecnician and producer, I immediately noticed the absurd lack of cohesion between presentations, performances, and everything in between. They were as such:

 

-A show like that CANNOT be without a head-presenter, an out-of-field voice won't do. A presenter keeps the show running and ties everything together. Learn from the MTV Awards.

 

-Some of the celebrities (!) presenting awards were so obviously uncomfortable with a microphone and an audience that was almost embarassing. They were stiff, over-rehearsed, and unnatural. Some of them couldn't wait to be outta there.

 

-the handling of microphones was technically amateurish. Think of Beck: he picks up his mic and first it blasts and distorts, then gets heavily ducked and limited, then comes back to audible level. Ridiculous.

 

-Audience reaction was heavily under-miked. It almost sounded like the presenters were addressing an empty hall, and pauses were heavy with...nothingness.

 

-Speaking of pauses, what was all that about? You can't leave an audience alone for even 5 seconds, let alone minutes; For example, when that idiot from Outkast receives his Grammy and walks away with a meager "thanks" because he thinks he's the new bad boy in town, there's an embarassing moment: everybody seems to be running away from stage lest they are recognized... a presenter would have bandaged the things back in shape.

 

-The lighting design was astonishing, no doubt about that, and the broadcast sound as well - except microphoning. Also, the positioning of the podium mic was unappropriate, forcing average-height people to heavily stoop toward it. Were two mics out of budget for the Grammys?

 

I think there are no technical, excuses for the faults I here described. To think that this is the 46th Grammy show, it's unfathomable for me.

[Max Ventura]

Something else I forgot:

 

The nominations for Best Rap Album were a bit strange: apart from Missy Elliot and one other, the Outkast and the Roots only claim to Rap-ness was being black. The Roots sound just like The Clash, and Outkast is a wanna-be Prince-meets-british Electro.

 

Bah.

 

Kudos for Dave Matthews, i'm not familiar with his music but he seems a sturdy, honest and serious performer, kinda like Springsteeen 20 years ago.

 

Kudos for Beyonce' as well, I don't like black music in general and much less I like heavily-trumpeted performers, but honestly speaking she earns all the money she's getting for the sheer amount of work she does.

 

Prince: Prince? Wasn't he from the '80s? Do we still need the guy?

[Dave Horne]

Since some of us live outside the US, we usually hear about these awards after the fact. Are the Awards replayed in the US by other channels?

 

I rarely watch 'music' TV channels - do they repeat the Grimmies as well? There's usually at least one Dutch TV channel that repeats the Oscars the next day and we get a chance to see that.

[ELP71]

I agree, Max - it was a horribly 'directed' production.

[coyote]

I thought the Outkast guy's simple "thank you" was classy. I find the "thanks to my producer, and thanks to my buddy Al, and thanks to everyotheridiotunderthesun and Hi Mom!" stuff tiresome. (I usually skip watching award shows for exactly this reason.)

[Byrdman]

I didn't see the Grammies, but one thing I hate about many such shows is they don't seem to believe in hiring any writers. So the presenter is left to struggle with a dull as dish water script, or no script at all, seemingly.

 

So, I would modify the statement that "you need a presenter" to "you need a presenter with a professionally written script"!

[CP]

Hey Max, I'm sorry that you generally don't like Black music. However, a few things:

 

1. OutKast is a rap group. Listen to their music before making statements about them. What made this album special was the risks they took.

 

2. Andre said thanks and walked off the stage, but he came back on the stage a few seconds later. It just cut to a commercial. I too get tired of the long drawn out acceptance speeches.

 

3. Lastly, are you kidding about Prince? Isn't Sting some guy from the 80's? Do we still need him?

[schmoron13]

max, please don't post in multiple forums. If you want, add a thread with a link in a new forum stating that some people should check this out, like "come on over to the SSS"

[dementia13]

I have not watched or cared about the Grammies since I was a kid. There were five nominees for Best New Artist: Elvis Costello, The Cars, Toto, A Taste Of Honey, and Chris Rea. Of course, the immortal Taste Of Honey walked off with the award. What a farce. When the Residents start getting awards, I'll tune back in. I'm not interested in somebody's popularity contest.

[Max Ventura]

Originally posted by CP:

1. OutKast is a rap group. Listen to their music before making statements about them. What made this album special was the risks they took.

 

2. Andre said thanks and walked off the stage, but he came back on the stage a few seconds later. It just cut to a commercial. I too get tired of the long drawn out acceptance speeches.

 

3. Lastly, are you kidding about Prince? Isn't Sting some guy from the 80's? Do we still need him?

1) Outkast is not a group, is a single guy. He got rid of the other guy and kept the name, changed the music. Risks? what risks?

 

2) Whatever he did, I thought it was rude and with no class. Long acceptance speeches are surely tiresome, but snatching the Award muttering something under your breath is a villain thing to do. If I was BB King I would have grabbed the guy by the neck and scalded him in front of everybod: "You don't give a damn? Then give it back right now!"

 

3) No, we do not need Sting either, I barely noticed him in fact. At least, though, Sting (who sold five times as many records as Prince did, with or without The Police) makes little claims to glamour and excellence, while the other is a walking statue to himself.

[CP]

I just read your other posts in the SSS forum. No need for me to respond to you.

[Steve in KS]

-Audience reaction was heavily under-miked. It almost sounded like the presenters were addressing an empty hall . . .

Although I purposely didn't watch the Grammys (since I think that "Best Rap" is an oxymoron, I've noticed a lot of audio mixing problems on live events since going digital and watching H.D. stuff with 5.1 sound.

There's no excuse for the bad mixes, but I think the industry is having a hard time trying to mix for 5.1. while simultaneously having to appease not only a 2 channel stereo audience but also lots of mono TV setups.

[steadyb]

Originally posted by Max Ventura:

Sting (who sold five times as many records as Prince did, with or without The Police)

Wow. Really?

 

I'd love to see the actual numbers that back that claim up.

[CP]

Originally posted by steadyb:

Originally posted by Max Ventura:

Sting (who sold five times as many records as Prince did, with or without The Police)

Wow. Really?

 

I'd love to see the actual numbers that back that claim up.

I would love to see it too. I do know that Prince has sold over 36 million records in his career. And that's only in the U.S. That would mean that Sting sold over 150 million records With those sales, Sting would be one the greatest selling artists of all time.

[Dave Bryce]

Originally posted by Steve in KS:

I think the industry is having a hard time trying to mix for 5.1. while simultaneously having to appease not only a 2 channel stereo audience but also lots of mono TV setups.

Randy Ezratty did the 5.1 mix separately from the stereo mix on a separate truck.

 

dB

[CP]

oops. double post.

[DallasPA]

Hmmmm,

 

Seems like Max is getting a hole ripped through him in the Sound, Studio, and Stage Forum. I suspect we won't be hearing from him anytime soon seeing he's taken on so much water.

 

hehehe

 

Dallas

[Analogaddict]

Originally posted by Max Ventura:

Originally posted by CP:

1. OutKast is a rap group. Listen to their music before making statements about them. What made this album special was the risks they took.

 

2. Andre said thanks and walked off the stage, but he came back on the stage a few seconds later. It just cut to a commercial. I too get tired of the long drawn out acceptance speeches.

 

3. Lastly, are you kidding about Prince? Isn't Sting some guy from the 80's? Do we still need him?

1) Outkast is not a group, is a single guy. He got rid of the other guy and kept the name, changed the music. Risks? what risks?

 

2) Whatever he did, I thought it was rude and with no class. Long acceptance speeches are surely tiresome, but snatching the Award muttering something under your breath is a villain thing to do. If I was BB King I would have grabbed the guy by the neck and scalded him in front of everybod: "You don't give a damn? Then give it back right now!"

 

3) No, we do not need Sting either, I barely noticed him in fact. At least, though, Sting (who sold five times as many records as Prince did, with or without The Police) makes little claims to glamour and excellence, while the other is a walking statue to himself.

Outkast is not a single guy, it´s a group. The album is a double album. Wannabee-Prince meets British Electroclash? have you heard a single cut from that album? Are you aware of the previous history of black music, with bands and artists such as Parliament/Funkadelic, Cameo and Bernie Worrell? And calling him an idiot wanting to be the new bad boy in town, come on! Outkast have been around since -94 or -95, and an idiot is probably the last description I´d use for somebody with his music making skills. Before we resort to name calling, please tell me you´ve made bigger contributions to the world of music than these guys. I don´t mean to flame you, but this kind of uninformed ranting really doesn´t contribute anything good. And to say that Prince isn´t valid because he´s from the 80´s, what´s that all about? I hope you are aware that Springsteen has been around since the 70´s, not to mention BB King... I do like Beyonce, though!

 

/J nas

[Superbobus]

Hey Max, better think first before you speak dude!

1) Outkast IS a group, not a singel guy. The drummer is Dutch and he used to be in the same conservatory as I was. Apparently he made some cool decisions...

2) WTF is all this talking about "Do we need Prince? Do we need Sting?" Are you out of your mind? As long as people are making great music, whether it's in 1316, 1848, 1984 or now, you don't have ANY reason to talk like that.

End of Rant, back to more important things.

[Max Ventura]

Originally posted by CP:

Originally posted by steadyb:

Originally posted by Max Ventura:

Sting (who sold five times as many records as Prince did, with or without The Police)

Wow. Really?

 

I'd love to see the actual numbers that back that claim up.

I would love to see it too. I do know that Prince has sold over 36 million records in his career. And that's only in the U.S. That would mean that Sting sold over 150 million records With those sales, Sting would be one the greatest selling artists of all time.

Well, the claim about Prince you make ("36 millions, and that's in the US alone!"), might well be all there is to it: Prince in Europe is not an asset: he's known by fame only, a far-heard name. I think he sold a little during the middle to late '80s but he's totally disappeared since. You should be aware that a lot of arena-sized artists from the US will play small venues, if at all, when they travel overseas. Same applies the other way around, mind you. A lot of big names see their fame pulverize the moment they board an airplane crossing the Atlantic.

 

As for Sting, I don't have any special interest in his music, but you cannot deny that the five albums by Police sold gazillions on both sides of the Atlantic, they're still played on the radio to this day and sold over the counter without being on sale, unlike most Prince albums, of which most people don't even know the titles. Sting by himself also sold a gazillion expecially before 1990, then he also did a lot of sidejobs, like those with Pavarotti and others, and those records sell another gazillion in the adult pop market, which maybe is not so much under the spotlight but it's big bucks nevertheless.

[schmoron13]

i know I shouldn't but it's just too damn easy!!! Max, a gazillion records?! don't you think you might be getting a lil carried away? and can you stop decontextualizing every argument? in the sss forums, you took race out of a comment like: "I dislike anything having to do with black culture," and here, you're discounting Prince cause he (supposedly)doesn't sell as well as he does/did in the US? oh, and before I forget: selling 46million units doesn't equate to: "he sold a little during the 80's." You know those Beatles boys? they sold a little in the 60's, but they dissapeared since

 

(by the way, it's ok to be wrong once in a while....know when the ship is sinking and let arguments die once in a while)

[coyote]

I had a friend some years ago who tried to set himself up as an authority on any subject. Had a tendency to sit with his arms folded tightly while belittling others' efforts... looked rather like Max leaning against that rock lol

 

Originally posted by schmoron13:

(by the way, it's ok to be wrong once in a while....know when the ship is sinking and let arguments die once in a while)

[Lee Tyler]

(by the way, it's ok to be wrong once in a while....know when the ship is sinking and let arguments die once in a while)

http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1780_1732375

 

[Steve LeBlanc]

Prince in Europe is not an asset: he's known by fame only, a far-heard name. I think he sold a little during the middle to late '80s but he's totally disappeared since.

er, wrong...Prince continues to do well in Europe...he does well period, making the music he chooses and still making a lot of money too...he doesn't need to be all over the news, his fanbase is strong.

[Jeebus]

Originally posted by coyote:

I had a friend some years ago who tried to set himself up as an authority on any subject. Had a tendency to sit with his arms folded tightly while belittling others' efforts... looked rather like Max leaning against that rock lol

LOL.

[DallasPA]

This stuff is hilarious!!!!!!

 

"A stubborn cuss he is"

 

Yoda- Attack of the Groans

 

Dallas

[CP]

If you look at the top selling albums of all time, Prince's Purple Rain is in the top 20. Having over 13 million albums sold in the US alone. There is not one Sting or Police album on the list. Go figure. No knock on Sting, because I like him. But please give Prince some kinda credit. He does have a very strong fanbase and has inspired a great deal of artists.

[Superbobus]

Is the question "Do we still need that musician?" depending on the amount of records that musician is selling?

[CP]

Originally posted by Superbobus:

Is the question "Do we still need that musician?" depending on the amount of records that musician is selling?

Nah, I don't think so. However, it's in response to his remark that Sting has outsold Prince 5 times over. I just found that remark a bit odd.

[Max Ventura]

er, wrong...Prince continues to do well in Europe...he does well period, making the music he chooses and still making a lot of money too...he doesn't need to be all over the news, his fanbase is strong

QUOTE]

 

er, wrong. As wrong as the guy a few posts above, who was quoting "the Top 20 Albums of all times".

Do you guys ever realize that everything in the USA is about the USA? Top 20 albums IN THE US. 36 million albums IN THE US ALONE. Granted, the US is a big market, with about 350 million residents and another 150/180 millions directly orbiting the US (Canada, Mexico, other satellite countries).

But I guess the 432 millions living in the European Community (plus about 440 millions among Russia and Eastern Countries, and those countries orbiting the commercial influence of Europe) can say their own, or do they rank only as "some bozos from the middle of nowhere"?

For your information, ever since "pop" music started out in the late '50, in Europe we've been listening MOSTLY to national artists, and secondly to British artists (Britain having the biggest influence on modern music this side of the Atlantic). American artists have always been in the charts, but at a much lesser rate and with a much weaker, if any, fan base. One of the reasons might be the scarcity of touring, another might be the language barrier.

In any case, take any US top 40 chart: it's full of names nobody ever heard over here, in fact they do not appear on any European charts except maybe the UK alone, where, because of the language, there is a better linkage with the US.

Eminem of course sells a lot over here too, but Nelly? P-Diddy? Jay-Z? The Black-Eyed Peas do, and Outkast did this only single that sold some, and of course J-Lo, Britney and M. Jackson do, but Staind? Phish? Guided by Voices? Queen Latifah? Country artists?

 

So, in order to conclude this diatribe that is kinda tiring me off, may I keep my own points of view and everybody else keep theirs? Please? Pleeez?