Monday, February 13, 2017


Ed Sheeran is horrible. It's not because I'm old. It's not because I miss Andy Williams. It's because Ed Sheeran is horrible. And so is Katy Perry. And if you're going to watch and complain about the Grammy Awards in the year 2017, then you only have yourself to blame.

I watched the Grammy Awards.

If you can guiltlessly mock "The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway" by Genesis or roll your eyes at "Shout It Out Loud" by Kiss, and yet give a rousing, standing O of respect to Beyonce and her bizarre, music-less, seven minutes that even Golan-Globus would have left on the cutting room floor, something is definitely rotten in Denmark.

And speaking of rotten in Denmark, here's Lukas Graham's Grammy nominated song.

Once I was seven years old, my mama told me,
"Go make yourself some friends or you'll be lonely."
Once I was seven years old

It was a big big world, but we thought we were bigger
Pushing each other to the limits, we were learning quicker
By eleven smoking herb and drinking burning liquor
Never rich so we were out to make that steady figure

Once I was eleven years old, my daddy told me,
"Go get yourself a wife or you'll be lonely."
Once I was eleven years old

I always had that dream, like my daddy before me
So I started writing songs, I started writing stories
Something about that glory just always seemed to bore me
'Cause only those I really love will ever really know me

This was a Grammy nominee for Record Of The Year? Remember "Playground In My Mind" by Clint Holmes? How about Jessie Colter's "I'm Not Lisa?" We hated those songs. "Only Seventeen" is one of those songs. And this is okay now.

I can recall sitting glued to the television for hours when MTV first came on the air, whining about bad videos by Saga while waiting for an Elvis Costello video, or wanting to the throw the remote at the screen when the "Safety Dance" video aired for the 15th time in one day. Today, Men Without Hats seem like Bacharach and David.

It couldn't have been just me who counted no more than three notes in the entire melody of that Katy Perry song? Or any Katy Perry song?

Nothing is right about any of this. Even a small pleasure like David Bowie getting his first Grammy Award is tainted by the fact that he won for Best Rock Performance on a record he recorded with a jazz  band. Plus, it was too late. Bowie is dead. Bowie is now the Peter Finch of glam.

As you may or may not know, I have no love for Adele, a perfectly decent, one trick singer who unbeknownst to me, made a "comeback" this year at the age of 27. The drama on stage during her pathetic, funereal take on George Michael's "Fast Love" was somehow embraced as heroic. "I'm sorry. It's live TV," Adele reminded us, as she carelessly tossed off "fucks" and asked to begin again. Live TV can't be easy...unless, you rehearse. (Adele meet Sid Caesar. Sid. Adele.) Her tribute to George Michael was neither moving nor entertaining. It was really more like Adele paying tribute to Adele. It made me squirm.

Megagaca seemed to delight many people on social media. "Finally, something refreshing." I enjoyed it. It was a holy mess, but less of a holy mess than everything else we had been subjected to up to that point. We loved it because it didn't suck. That's the way we treat music in 2017. If we don't absolutely hate it, it's Mozart.

And how about that ill-advised Bee Gees tribute? I read a few comments asking,"Why pay tribute to the horrible disco years?" For one thing, the Bee Gees disco years were far from horrible. The Brothers Gibb reinvented themselves and took on the world with some of the greatest pop singles in the history of music. Plus, it will soon be the 40th anniversary of that reinvention. That explains wanting to pay tribute. It also explains not one song played from "Cucumber Castle." But, I digress. The cast of characters chosen to sing 90 seconds of four songs, while a voice similar to Martha Stewart's casually announced each performer over the music, was mind-bogglingly bad.. Truly, a shambles, that even for the Grammy Awards, was an embarrassment. I imagine Barry Gibb was singing to himself the way we were told to repeat, "It's only a movie" when we went to see "The Last House On The Left."

I realize this ranting is just spitting in the wind, and many times, it can backfire. I fully expect the cards and letters to come in defending Solange, Frank Ocean, Little Big Town, Kelsea Ballerini, Mrs. Manicotti, Queen B, Adele and all the other "kids" who just want to have fun and be heard. We had our chance. Why shouldn't they? Well, of course they should. But at what point do we stop accepting spectacle over substance?

I have this vision of John Hiatt singing "Have A Little Faith In Me" surrounded by 25 male dancers dressed like Darth Vader. Or, Elvis Costello singing "Alison" while swinging from a trapeze. Or, Black Sabbath calling Joni Mitchell up on stage for an ironic cover of "Free Man In Paris." Of course, this is all very silly, except it's what we watch every February on CBS. Only the names have been changed.

Is there no chance at all that this will ever change for the better? Can it be that music will actually get worse as we get older? All of our heroes are dying and I don't see anyone carrying the torches. Some are trying. But too many have no idea whose torches they need to carry. That is the problem. That is our fault.



Well said young man.

I never really "got" the Grammys yet manfully sat down to watch last night. I didn't make it very far. I switched to The Simpsons where Patty and Selma hosted the annual DMV Awards -- "The Surlies" -- now there's an awards show we can get behind!

soundsource said...

Yea Ed whatever sucks. I saw him on SNL and I was like WTF is the big deal about that guy. As for the Grammys I just don't bother. I've got to learn the entire Dead cannon in like two weeks that's enough for me. Between awards shows Trump and the news I've just been rewatching the entire Sopranos. Happier times.

Charlie Messing said...

Yes Sal, I sure do know what you mean. The Oscars are tangential to quality movies, and the Grammys are worse. The big production numbers and tuxedos and one-time dresses have SO little to do with anything. Waiting till Bowie is gone and awarding Rock to not-rock (Tull over Metallica, anyone?). I, and some friends, were hoping the ORK Records Box would win for either best album notes (it's a book) or for best historical box set. But, as with last year, the winner for historical box was Dylan's Bootleg Series. The other award went to the notes for the set of Sissle and Blake (writers of "The Charleston" and many others). Why did it go to Dylan two years in a row? Politics? I like what Bobby Rush said: winning his first Grammy at age 83 for best traditional blues album, for “Porcupine Meat,” he said: “This is my 374th record. And finally.”

David said...

Thanks for this line: " . . . seven minutes that even Golan-Globus would have left on the cutting room floor . . ."

Shriner said...

I watched most of it (will finish it later tonight as I preferred to watch the season premiere of the Walking Dead and then it got late and I too tired to wait for the "in memoriam" tribute...get off my lawn!) I loved The Time doing Jungle Love (oh-we-oh-we-oh! -- and that shuffle dance move took me back to 1984 -- loved it!) and Bruno Mars' Prince tribute (though his lead guitar playing -- the less said the better...)

Hetfield's mike not working was live TV at it's finest, I thought. Gaga continues to impress me as a live artist every time I see her.

Adele's "Hello" opener was good, but that dirge she sang to George Michael bored me to tears and would rather it not have been restarted. The Bee Gees tribute was pretty awful. Tori Kelly ruined "Tragedy" for me.

I *do not get* Ed Sheerhan. I thought he sucked on SNL, too.

And definitely do I *not* get the new Beyonce. I get the visual spectacle of the songs, but there is *nothing* catchy about anything she's performed live from it. *Zero* melody. I asked my daughter about it and she said it took her 3-4 listens to it, but now she "gets it" and it's more a story than a musical experience. Maybe. If I want a story, I'll put Jesus Christ Superstar on again. But Formation is tuneless. It's *sung* -- it's not rap -- so there should be *some* melody line -- somewhere. It doesn't need a chorus (some great songs have no chorus like "Up The Junction"...), but it should have *something* hooky somewhere? I fully understand it's not an album aimed at me, but I appreciated Adele winning over this and I respect that the Grammy voters are still voting for songs over "events".

The Katy Perry song was...pleasant? Fine? Energetic? Clearly not as hook-filled as her other songs. I actually appreciate her for what she does.

And I will admit to finding that Keith Urban/Carrie Underwood completely-formulaic song -- quite toe-tapping and enjoyable.

And I will admit to smiling broadly at the Carpool Karaoke of Sweet Caroline. *That's* why I watch the Grammys -- the whole arena singing it was wonderful -- for something unscripted like that.

Ken D said...

Thanks for watching so I don't have to. But really, you should stop poking sticks in your eyes and ears every year.

Anonymous said...

Remind me when the little gold plated paperweight was ever relevant. Several friends who have musical tastes that never fit this show (they tend to lean prog or hard rock) watched this and complained - why? There's plenty of good music, old and new, out there that can be accessed and enjoyed in a number of ways; watch and listen to that. Most of the people here know what they like and how to get it, so do it, leave the pomp and circumstance to the circus. Now that the elephants are gone, what's left?

Anonymous said...

Love the rant. But you know it's not about the music anymore, it hasn't been for at least 20-30 years. It's about being seen, being "hip" Music has become background noise while the young tweet, Facebook or whatever today's latest thing is. It's about having a million dollar cell-phone that all of your friends have. To say that the music of today is wasted on the young would be an understatement the young are getting what they deserve. For all of us old-timers, who has the time to listen to the junk they try to scam on the young? Thank God that some (Rhino, Collectors Choice) have not forgotten that there are still enough of us "old-timers" that still have buying power and have not yet heard the full catalog of our favorite bands. There is still so music music that was made from 40-50 years ago that I'm still discovering. I would not be able to tell the difference between 21 pilots or Ed Whatshisname. That's why Bowie gets the nod now and not during his heyday, Bowie posed a threat at one time that challenged those that thought they made the rules for the record buying public. Same thing for Iggy. Hell next year they'll probably nominate "Raw Power" for best Heavy-Metal album. No the Grammy's are not about the true music fan. There for the people who will watch Entertainment Tonight, American Idol, and read People magazine while texting on said cell-phone. Meanwhile the world will come to an end while we wait for the next Adele, Beyonce, album and there will be no rock musicians telling us to wake the fuck up. Oh shit now I've ranted. Thanks Sal for letting me get that off my chest.

Noam Sane said...

My teenage daughter somehow left her room last night - I swear, first time in years, it took me a few minutes to recognize her - and actually sat with me and watched some of this show. She specifically wanted to see Beyonce. About three minutes in I glanced over and she was staring at her phone. Not multitasking - bored. Around the five minute mark, she asked me to fast-forward (sadly, we were watching live.) I'm not sure what Beyonce was going for, but her self-regard is obviously through the roof. Costume-wise, at first glance, I thought Liz Taylor had fallen asleep at the beach.

Metallica, as they tend to, went chunka-chunka on a single chord for 6 minutes, and it was one of the rare times when a broken mic was a plus. Hetfield, ever the pro, had a hissy fit afterward, kicking his mic stand and throwing his guitar. Maybe time to book another appointment with his therapist.

Katy Perry - whatever the song was, I don't care, but the art design was very impressive. I guess that was the highlight for me.

The Bee Gees thing was loud and stupid, which is exactly what the Bee Gees (at their best) weren't. (Cucumber Castle!...they loved their weed, didn't they?)

Adele is a foghorn. Do. Not. Get. It.

I don't know anything about the host guy but his stick was very douchebag-at-the-end-of-the-bar, but without the humor.

These are truly desperate times.

J. Loslo said...

My wife and I watched with the sound off. Not sure what that says, or about whom.

When did we reach the point where entertainment has to be over-the-top spectacle? Why does everything have to be the Super Bowl Halftime Show? Why does the Super Bowl Halftime Show have to be the Super Bowl Halftime Show? As Sal suggests, if people can't be moved by one person, an acoustic guitar, and a decent song, we've really lost something.

big bad wolf said...

i love the rant too.

to be fair, the grammys have almost always been out of touch. i watch out of curiosity, out of not wanting to be too out of touch, and out of the sense that there is usually one performance worth seeing. for me, last night that was the time, but i also rather liked metallica and lady gaga, though neither does much for me most times.

beyonce baffles me. it's a joke, right? not the music, the reaction. everyone's pretending to like it and praising her as part of the joke, right? they don't really think it's good, or enjoyable, or, god help me, thoughtful, right?. bloated emptiness. i suppose that is an accomplishment.

i want "crazy in love" back. that was a great song. the woman could be a great pop singer. an artist she ain't

Anonymous said...

Wow. I didn't see it...but I haven't seen the Grammys since, if even then, the 1970s, perhaps when both The Cars and Elvis Costello were overlooked for Best New Artist (1979) in favor of A Taste Of Honey, a one-(disco)hit-wonder. Not cuz I'm too cool, or too cool for TV (I've never owned a TV and haven't had access to one since I moved out from living with a buddy in 2000), but because it's a confluence of a couple things I'm not really engaged in -- the aforementioned television and popular hitmakers. Let me make it clear, tho, I loves me good pop music, and in fact look at the 1980s as the last great era of pop singles (even if many sound so dated now due to those 'ksh ksh ksh' fake drum sounds and trebley synth washes), even as I was buying my Minutemen, REM, Scratch Acid and Saints records/CDs. But I wouldn't've watched the Grammys even in the '80s cuz I'd've expected to see much more dross than good, not being a fan generally of corporate rock, hair metal and power balladry. Having said all that, when I read or hear about something good or egregiously bad on the Grammys after the fact, I will look on YouTube to see it. That's how I saw the tribute to Joe Strummer some years back, which I really really liked. I'm not familiar with the music of Perry, Sheeran or Beyonce, so I might look at those (if on YouTube) to see what passes for artistry these days, tho I suspect I won't be impressed. I've heard a couple Adele songs, and thought she sang well; it didn't make me curious to hear more, tho.
I didn't care particularly for the BeeGees disco years while living them (tho I loved 'Tragedy' from the get-go), but I hear great pop songs in some of them now, and when I heard a slowed-down, rootsy cover of 'Stayin' Alive' a few years ago, realized it had good lyrics, too (I never liked those squealy voices on the originals, and often couldn't decipher the lyrics).
I'm one of those guys who mock 'Lamb' and eye-roll at KISS, but I figure to each his/her own. But I will politely have issue with your last word. I don't know that the sorry state of pop/rock music is 'our' fault. We, as conscientious consumers, are far outnumbered by less-discriminating consumers, and in fact always have been. Sometimes the masses find concordance with the more discriminating or more passionate consumers -- so a critically-approved release is also a big seller -- but mostly that doesn't happen (tho you've made a compelling case in a few of your posts about how nothing seems to get less than 3 stars in reviews anymore...). I'll take no more responsibility for Beyonce or Ed Sheeran than I will for TrumpleThinSkin, cuz I do not buy the former's releases and I voted and rallied against the latter. At least with the pop music debacle, we all have alternate past and present choices if the main course seems tainted.
And, finally, I love love love to read your rants as much as your encomia; passion about music is always worthy reading to me. I disagree heartily with some of your choices, but agree heartily with others, and have been turned on to stuff I wasn't familiar with via this site. So keep it up, please.
C in California

Sal Nunziato said...

To C In Cali,
First off, thank you.

Not coincidentally, I had been thinking about my "last word." This is what I was thinking.

If you believe Peter Guralnick, Elvis Presley wanted to sing because he loved old spirituals, country music, and when no one was looking, old race records and raw blues and R&B. When be became "Elvis" in 1955-1956, he would always find himself singing those same spirituals in between pelvis shakes on the Milton Berle show.

John and Paul would travel far and wide, as did Mick and Keith, Erics Burdon and Clapton, to find find old blues and Motown records, and often cover these, like The Fabs, on their records. Hell, both Marvin Gaye and Aretha made five or more records each of standards before they became the hitmakers we now know.

When I was a kid, I wouldn't be denied listening to the Chipmunks if I wanted, but I also wasn't denied access to my parents Elvis, Sinatra, Beatles and Stones records, if that is what I wanted.

It seems to me that history has been abandoned, as if it is no longer important. Sure, it's been 50 years since this music changed the world, but I don't even hear George Michael or R.E.M. in today's pop and rock music. It should be mandatory.

A fun minute from the awards was the Sweet Caroline singalong. John Legend had a teleprompter and still could barely piece together the words and melody. Had he never heard Sweet Caroline? Or of Neil Diamond?

Music barely has rhythm anymore. There are beats, sure. But no groove. Or, there's only a groove and no melody. Why isn't anyone in charge, calling that out?

Take a look at the five nominees for Best Rap Song:
Best Rap Song:

"All The Way Up" — Joseph Cartagena, Edward Davadi, Shandel Green, Karim Kharbouch, Andre Christopher Lyon, Reminisce Mackie & Marcello Valenzano, songwriters (Fat Joe & Remy Ma featuring French Montana & Infared)

"Famous" — Chancelor Bennett, Ross Birchard, Ernest Brown, Andrew Dawson, Kasseem Dean, Mike Dean, Noah Goldstein, Kejuan Muchita, Patrick Reynolds, Kanye West & Cydel Young, songwriters (Kanye West featuring Rihanna)

"Hotline Bling" — Aubrey Graham & Paul Jefferies, songwriters (Drake)

"No Problem" — Chancelor Bennett, Dwayne Carter & Tauheed Epps, songwriters (Chance The Rapper featuring Lil Wayne & 2 Chainz)

"Ultralight Beam" — Chancelor Bennett, Kasseem Dean, Mike Dean, Kirk Franklin, Noah Goldstein, Samuel Griesemer, Terius Nash, Jerome Potter, Kelly Price, Nico "Donnie Trumpet" Segal, Derek Watkins, Kanye West & Cydel Young, songwriters (Kanye West featuring Chance The Rapper, Kelly Price, Kirk Franklin & The-Dream)

There are 128 names associated with these five songs, that for all intents and purposes, aren't even sung.

Yes times have changed and yes I admit I have lost patience. But somewhere along the line, the bar was lowered so far, it was buried and too many of us just went along with it.

Anonymous said...

I believe Guralnick. But I also know that the gate-keeping of the past -- 3 major TV networks, a limited number and reach of radio stations, the major record companies, access to one's local music scene (surely a factor for young Elvis), etc, have been obliterated and people have many more (oftentimes lousy) choices for what influences and engages them. Is this good or bad? As a cultural relativist, I'm loath to judge since I'm hyperaware that culture, being a human invention, goes where it's purveyors take it regardless of objective standards. So, while I lament that there aren't records being released anymore that engage me like REM's early ones, or Sabbath's 'Paranoid' album (along with ELP's debut and T Rex's 'Zinc Alloy', one of my first 3 purchases in the early 1970s), or Frankie Ford's 'Sea Cruise', I'm delighted when I do hear something I like, and figure the dross can be shucked off on the suckers. And I can explore backwards as easily as laterally, given the long history of recorded music. I guess it's counterintuitive that more choices have given rise to more crap -- you'd think diversity would enrich the resulting output -- but it appears that the lowest common denominator has a wider swath, and bigger influence, when given more room. I have to admit, many of the choices the old gate-keepers made were as awful to me as the free-for-all of today. But I don't know that modern gate-keeping would produce any Dylans or Franklins or Ramones, anyway, since those folks were working with and from the formative years of this music you and I love so much. Could a 1990s/2000s-bred musician produce something as grand from the same influences without sounding overtly retro? I doubt it, but maybe. Early My Morning Jacket hit that sweet spot, but they didn't go up for Grammy awards, either (as far as I know).
C in California

Chris Collins said...

I ignored the Grammys because they're the grammys. I saw some performances online. I think Adele is ...fine. But I don't get the George Michael tribute at all. Taking all of the joy and energy out of that song is pointless. "Hello" is fine Adult Contemporary. No more. It would have fin in nicely between Whitney and Air Supply in the 80s.

I do like Beyonce. "Lemonade" has at least 5 very good songs on it, and these days that's a lot. Does that mean that she's a goddess? No. She's a good pop star. She's Diana Ross or Janet. That's it.

I like Gaga. Can't help it. I know she still needs the songs to catch up with her but "Bad Romance" was a good one and so is "A Million Reasons". I should look up the Metallica thing.

Ed Sheeran needs to go to jail. For real. Enough of this shit.

TJWood said...

But look on the bright side--there was no Sam Smith this year:)

Anonymous said...

Just curious. Does anyone know who or what determines now what gets played on the radio?

Michael Giltz said...

Apologies! You did indeed mock "Seven Years." It was an especially bad Grammy Awards, with not a single truly memorable performance. Usually, one gets a few. But the awards themselves have never mattered and don't believe you ever felt they did. Sure sometimes Graceland and Thriller win album of the year. Other times its Celine Dion and Lionel Richie. But Stevie Wonder won it three times! In general, they have more link to the best albums of the year than the Oscars have to the best movies of the year. Maybe once a decade my taste and their taste converges on Album and that's about it. So what? But yeah, the performances were bad.

A guy called Tak said...

I don't care Grammy's since they voted 'Winchester Cathedral' over 'Good Vibrations' for Best Contemporary Song in 1967.
All about popularity and entertainment.

kevin m said...

After a long day at work, I made my wife read this post and she burst out laughing. So well done Sal!

Jim G said...

Agree with all of this. The Grammy show hasn't been good in a long time. (Personal to the Grammys: stop telling us a "Grammy moment" is coming up. You can't plan or schedule them. This is music, it happens on its own, if it happens at all. We will tell you when a Grammy moment has occurred. Thank you) That said, I just can't help the tiny, yet nagging feeling that we are all just a bunch of grumpy old men who might be missing something. And then I look at the piles of music I have yet to listen to, almost all of which I know is more worthy of my time than anything on the Grammys, and the feeling passes.

buzzbabyjesus said...

Every year I say the same thing about the Grammys:

The last time I watched then was to see Macca sprint up in sneakers to accept one for "Let It Be" on behalf of The Beatles. The "Grammy Moment" was the introduction of "Maybe I'm Amazed" as a video (short film). That was 1970.

Music I love is almost never on them.

I haven't the slightest who Ed Sheeran is.

Shriner said...

Sal -- my feeling on the "writer" listing on (some) rap songs it just a way to spread the royalties around to friends, helpers, music insiders, etc. I don't begrudge the number of names on a song credit should the artist be willing to share the wealth if it becomes a hit song.

Even the Monkees did this by giving their recording engineer a "writing" credit on one song on Headquarters ("No Time") just as a favor for being supportive on the project, etc. Story goes the guy made enough money off those royalties to buy a house.

And I don't think any of us should be looking at rap songs for anything more than beats + lyrics -- period.

richeye said...

First.... THANK YOU!!!

Second, people who "like" Ed Sheeran don't even like Ed Sheeran. They like Taylor Swift and she likes Ed Sheeran. He can't even rock that disheveled look and that takes absolutely no effort, much like his songs. He's boring beyond belief and he'll be bald inside of 5 years. Ah, time to reinvent himself as Peter Garrett's folksy cousin. Blecccch.

Sal Nunziato said...

"And I don't think any of us should be looking at rap songs for anything more than beats + lyrics -- period."

Is Katy Perry rap? That "song" was beats and three notes.

I understand hip hop, Shriner, and certainly don't expect any more than what it is. It may not speak to me, but I do get it. My points were really an expansion on my last word, as C In Cali pointed out. I was pointing out all the "writers" credited on five songs simply to illustrate the difference between now and then. One friend getting a credit for one song on a Monkees record is not the same thing, at least not to me.

You were once able to hear the influence of music from the past on new music. Now, songs are barely a verse and a chorus, poorly sung over over a cool ringtone. It's all very cold. It lacks heart and lacks soul. And I believe that that is a result of NOT embracing the past, or looking beyond getting a million hits on a video. People don't make "records" anymore.

M_Sharp said...

I haven't watched most of the Grammys in years, I just flip over when whatever else I'm watching goes to the commercials. I scrolled through their entire list of nominations, there were very few that I cared about, and a lot I of people never heard and have very little interest in hearing. Most of the music I like doesn't get nominated, and if it does, it's in the categories that get their awards in the afternoon. It was good to see William Bell win, it would have been better to have him perform on prime time, but people like him don't help their ratings. Sturgill Simpson won, but I can barely understand him when he sings. Robbie Fulks had two nominations but didn't win.

I can't stand Ed Sheeran, I suspect that he tousles his hair in the mirror for a half hour before he goes out. I give Katy Perry a pass because she's a hot babe.

I doubt that the show will improve, they want it to be a mini Super Bowl halftime spectacle aerobics workout. Ratings and ad $$ rule. Who knows about the music, most of the hitmaker's roots don't seem to go back past 1990. Good rant, thanks.

Sal Nunziato said...

"Sturgill Simpson won, but I can barely understand him when he sings."

I wanna love this guy bad. But, like you M_Sharp, I don't know what I am listening to half the time. He sings like his jaw is wired shut.

Northing said...

The Grammys have never, in my lifetime, been confused with artistic endeavor. It's an industry award and as such tends to honor commercial success more than innovation or genius (until an artist dies). And television only dumbs it down to an irriducable lump of charcoal.

Michael "Bear" Arlt said...

I'm with you, the Grammys sucked since 1998.

Bill said...

I enjoyed Sturgil Simpson on Saturday Night Live a couple of weeks ago. It was the first time I heard of him, or heard any of his music--and the first time in a long time that I actually watched any of the songs on that show. Use I fast forward through them.

Anonymous said...

I thought Jethro Tull won best "rock" album. How did I miss that Bowie's Blackstar won rock ablum of the year? What about Miss Brown's Cookie Jam Band for best blues album? How'd they do? And did Schtum win best folk album? I know that they recut their debut with mandolins, harmoniums and triangle!