Great Artist

Today's fourth update, please recommend, please subscribe!

​​

The Grammy Awards ceremony, which is over 500 years old, has come to an end, but the heated discussion caused by the 50th ceremony has become more and more noisy.

​​

In fact, the Grammys on the night of the awards ceremony were still star-studded, Kanye West, Beyonce, Alicia Keys, Rihanna, Fergie, Chris Brown, John Mayer, etc. Popular singers attended the ceremony. Although they lacked super big names like Evan-Bell and U2 in previous years that could shock the scene, in terms of popularity alone, Grammys still made a lot of preparations for their 50th birthday. Various cooperation stages, a variety of retrospective sessions, and the presence of many film and television stars including Tom Hanks to present awards are all booing. Even with the haze of screenwriters, the awards ceremony was still held in full swing.

​​

But it is a pity that these wonderful performances and star-studded stars have not been able to attract the attention of too many TV audiences. In the second day's TV viewing statistics, only 16.5 million viewers tuned in to the live broadcast of the Grammys.

​​

This statistic is the worst ratings of the Grammy Awards in 50 years. Grammy's 50th birthday, judging from the results, it's not a good thing to be thankful for.

​​

In 2006, the Grammy Awards slumped to an all-time low, with only 17 million viewers; but last year, in 2007, the Grammys rebounded strongly, surpassing 25 million viewers. And this year, the Grammys fell into another weird situation. The number of viewers plummeted by nearly 10 million, and the most important part of the ratings, from the age of eighteen to forty-nine, dropped by more than half. what does that mean? It means that young people don't care about Grammys at all! And the general audience in the United States has lost interest in the Grammys.

​​

This is definitely bad news.

​​

Last year, Grammys already faced a crusade. The 49th Grammy did not give a good answer to the album "Four", which is a perfect combination of business and art. "Four" swept the best production of the year, the annual Best Record, Song of the Year, but came home empty-handed in the department's individual awards. This also makes Evan Bell the first singer in Grammy history to win an overall award but miss out on a divisional award, which is definitely not a glamorous historical record.

​​

Beginning with "Only Pop without Music" at the 46th Grammy Awards, the Grammy Awards has been struggling for the past five years, how to find the perfect balance between pop and art , the Grammys are clearly losing themselves. The subsequent 47th Evan Bell and Nora Jones shined, and the 48th U2 dominated the roost, which also made people see the efforts of the Grammys, but last year Grammys organized the annual cake-sharing ceremony. smashed, messed up.

​​

This year, the Grammy Awards, which honored Amy Winehouse and Kanye West, sparked a wave of controversy, as the Grammys' commercial metrics shine, while the music itself is gradually lost in Hollywood's Paper drunk in gold fans.

​​

In the 1990s, the Grammys were relatively unaffected by the entire listening audience in an environment without the Internet, so the judges always judged the music from a professional point of view, and then Recommend truly excellent music to a wide range of fans.

​​

With the advent of the Internet age, bulletin boards and the online version of "Rolling Stone" can let people know the latest information, and later the rise of iTunes has allowed people to have a platform to search for their favorite music, not to mention ubube, face After the rise of social networks such as books, the advantages of group gathering have been gradually enlarged: people can easily search for their favorite music from netizens who have the same music hobby.

​​

As a result, business is becoming more and more commercial, and the niche is more and more united.

​​

In this case, the role of the Grammys as a guide is less and less obvious, and people no longer search for good music through the Grammys. If the Grammys don't choose music that fans like, it will easily lose the audience's attention. As a last resort, Grammys also began to collect information from all aspects, hoping to attract attention with the music that the public likes. The direct result of this situation is that Grammys have more and more commercial elements, and music with popularity, sales and commercial achievements has gradually occupied the mainstream in Grammys.

​​

In fact, the position of the Grammys is also very awkward. From the perspective of guiding listening, young people today do not need the guidance of the Grammy judges at all, even if the Grammys are the most influential music in the world. Ceremony, but for young people, there is no need to exist, because Grammy's information is not new, and its annual awards even lag behind - for example, Taylor Swift clearly debuted in 2006, However, due to the division of registration time, he became a newcomer in 2007 and entered the 50th Grammy competition. This time difference is countless in Grammys. Not only some, but even the authority is being questioned by more and more people.

For example, last year, "Four", a classic masterpiece, was able to sweep the comprehensive awards, but it was hard to get a single award in a single department. This situation is really absurd and ridiculous.

​​

But the Grammys will not lose their value because of the loss of the authority of "guiding listening", because it also has a guiding significance at the production level. For those bosses and producers in the recording industry, the Grammy awards are all It's worth pondering why.

​​

For example, in the Best Producer of the Year, the recording and mixing skills in it are worth learning and research; for example, in the Best Song of the Year, the production skills of an excellent song have been integrated with the background of the times, which are all valuable references. of. The four comprehensive awards have their own special significance.

​​

But the problem is, whether it is listening to guidance or production guidance, if Grammys only focus on professionalism and do not pay attention to popularity and sales, then the meaning of guidance will inevitably be weakened, and even no one will pay attention. To put it simply, the Grammys also cost money to hold. If there is no audience rating and no attention, then the awards ceremony will not be able to go on without sponsors.

​​

So, in recent years, the Grammys have been trying to find a balance, and the 46th has screwed up, and Beyoncé's big win has brought the popularity of the awards ceremony to a peak; Nora-Jones was well-received; the Forty-Eighth was quite satisfactory, both in terms of awards and ratings; the Forty-ninth won and lost in ratings. The monument, especially the arrangement of the Evan Bell Award, can definitely be said to be a tragic farce; and at the 50th session, it was completely mired in the mud.

​​

The Grammys, who have just celebrated their 50th birthday, are facing a critical point in all aspects. Excessive commercialization is still a criticism, criticism is the second blow, and the decline in audience attention is a fatal blow. Now looking at the Grammy's situation is: even if it is commercialized, no one pays attention, not only no one pays attention, And be scolded bloody.

​​

Then why is this? The Grammys are already trying their best to please the audience, but the audience doesn't buy it!

​​

"Disappointing", when such an adjective was placed in front of Grammys, this was indeed an unexpected situation. The term comes from Rolling Stone's title for the 50th Grammy Awards.

​​

"After last year's tragedy, this year's Grammys not only did not improve, but also slipped into a more terrifying abyss.

​​

The reason why Amy-Winehouse can win is because her album is the top-selling singer who has won various nominations, and the strong American factor is the second reason for her to win the award. In addition, I can't find a reason why she's better than Pfister, Kanye West, Spitfire. Of course, she's less of a laudable focus than Justin Timberlake, Beyoncé and Rihanna's pop vibes.

​​

Herbie-Hanko's win is more like a victory for a group of outstanding producers, Norah-Jones, Tina Turner, Leonard-Cohen, and the old and tough jazz musicians. Let Herbie Hanko get the first phonograph in his life.

​​

Every year, I look forward to seeing some dark horses at the Grammys, but since Evan Bell and Nora Jones, I haven't felt a surprise for a long time. Over the past few years, I have felt that Grammys night is like the most normal time of the year for Americans, without any rebelliousness or unpopularity at all. It wasn't until today that I realized that it was just a business evaluation certificate issued by the recording industry to tell those winners: You are excellent because you have done excellent revenue-generating work for the American recording industry.

​​

Other than that, there is no other meaning. "

​​

"Rolling Stone"'s review of the Grammys is not unheard of~www.wuxiaspot.com~ It can even be said to be severe.

​​

In fact, if you look closely, you can find that since the Grammys entered the 21st century, they have been criticized for being too commercial, even in the years when Evan Bell won a big victory, but the only difference is that, Evan Bell's album, "Music First," makes the Grammy's commercial a little less obnoxious. But if you really think about it, you can see that Evan-Bell winning the award is actually a commercial victory, because Evan-Bell's albums often achieve amazing sales results.

​​

So, what do you see from here? Business is never a shameful thing, because everyone knows that it is impossible for the Grammys to go on without advertising sponsorship. But compromising business and courting the audience does not mean the passage of music itself. It's the same sentence, "Without music, there is only pop...", which is absolutely impossible.

​​

The Grammys have always struggled to find the balance between art and commerce, which is what every awards ceremony must explore. But at present, it seems that there are too many commercial components on the scale of Grammys. Perhaps, after such a bad 50th birthday, Grammys should have a hard time. Because, if you don't reflect on it, even if there is a business, the audience will still pass away, then how long the Grammys can last is a question that will emerge in the line of sight soon.

​​

12,000 updates, ask for a monthly pass! (To be continued, if you like this work, you are welcome to come and vote (an) to vote for recommendation and monthly tickets. Your support is my biggest motivation.) "This text is provided by the breaking dawn update group @"