Chuck Nessa Posted February 10, 2006 Report Share Posted February 10, 2006 One thing is certain, the awards should not be seen as a measure of talent. I'm shocked an industry veteran would take such a position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundog Posted February 10, 2006 Report Share Posted February 10, 2006 Now Herbie Hancock is accompanying a total destruction of Leon Russell's "A Song for You." This poor woman is simply clueless and Herbie is aiding and abetting. Horrible, and the crowd loves it! Well, at least the hired audience does. The sad thing was, it was a step up for her as that was better than anything else she'd previously done (no real challenge there), and a giant step DOWN for him (can't beieve this is the same man who penned "Dolphin Dance").... ..."aiding and abetting" seems a bit strong. He may simply be acting in the capacity of a mentor. The girl does have some serious vocals chops, and she has expressed more than a passing interest in jazz. Herbie's a open-minded musician who knows the industry inside out. Seems like a good fit; potentially very rewarding for both parties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harold_Z Posted February 10, 2006 Report Share Posted February 10, 2006 Industry awards = promotion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Nessa Posted February 10, 2006 Report Share Posted February 10, 2006 ..."aiding and abetting" seems a bit strong. He may simply be acting in the capacity of a mentor. The girl does have some serious vocals chops, and she has expressed more than a passing interest in jazz. Herbie's a open-minded musician who knows the industry inside out. Seems like a good fit; potentially very rewarding for both parties. You must work for some politician. The "spin" is dizzying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted February 10, 2006 Report Share Posted February 10, 2006 (edited) Industry awards are, in the main, a joke. In the case of the entertainment industry, what originally probably is created to honor achievement quickly soon becomes little more than a source of income, and it is all centered around the annual TV show. I think the Oscars can still lure people into theaters, but I don't see Grammys selling records or attracting people to concerts or clubs. As I have said before, on an old thread that dealt with this topic, what these trophies do for you depends largely on how you work them. When a friend of mine was awarded a Tony for a Broadway musical, he immediately hired a PR person to exploit it. The Tony functioned as an excuse for media exposure and that, in turn, brought more work. One job alone paid for the PR person. The rest of the show's Tony winners did nothing but sit around and wait for their award to attract people--that usually doesn't work. These things are quickly forgotten, so one has to milk them while they're hot. The Academy Awards, certainly, were created really to help promote movies. Rewarding perceived accomplishment is a useful way to do it. Most presenters are people with upcoming films, etc. I'm sure the Grammys are the same. So if you win one and don't promote, then really you are failing the Academy. ;-) Of course, Harry Smith won one for lifetime achievement for the Anthology of American Folk Music, so occasinally some good things happen. Edited February 10, 2006 by Adam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7/4 Posted February 10, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 10, 2006 Industry awards are, in the main, a joke. In the case of the entertainment industry, what originally probably is created to honor achievement quickly soon becomes little more than a source of income, and it is all centered around the annual TV show. I think the Oscars can still lure people into theaters, but I don't see Grammys selling records or attracting people to concerts or clubs. As I have said before, on an old thread that dealt with this topic, what these trophies do for you depends largely on how you work them. When a friend of mine was awarded a Tony for a Broadway musical, he immediately hired a PR person to exploit it. The Tony functioned as an excuse for media exposure and that, in turn, brought more work. One job alone paid for the PR person. The rest of the show's Tony winners did nothing but sit around and wait for their award to attract people--that usually doesn't work. These things are quickly forgotten, so one has to milk them while they're hot. The Academy Awards, certainly, were created really to help promote movies. Rewarding perceived accomplishment is a useful way to do it. Most presenters are people with upcoming films, etc. I'm sure the Grammys are the same. So if you win one and don't promote, then really you are failing the Academy. ;-) Of course, Harry Smith won one for lifetime achievement for the Anthology of American Folk Music and died soon thereafter, so occasinally some good things happen. So you're saying it's a good thing Harry Smith is dead? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundog Posted February 10, 2006 Report Share Posted February 10, 2006 (edited) Call me crazy, but I think there's a good jazz voice in there somewhere. P.S. Politician, No. Quality Assurance, Yes. (Granted, it seems like the same thing most days) Edited February 10, 2006 by Sundog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted February 10, 2006 Report Share Posted February 10, 2006 Industry awards are, in the main, a joke. In the case of the entertainment industry, what originally probably is created to honor achievement quickly soon becomes little more than a source of income, and it is all centered around the annual TV show. I think the Oscars can still lure people into theaters, but I don't see Grammys selling records or attracting people to concerts or clubs. As I have said before, on an old thread that dealt with this topic, what these trophies do for you depends largely on how you work them. When a friend of mine was awarded a Tony for a Broadway musical, he immediately hired a PR person to exploit it. The Tony functioned as an excuse for media exposure and that, in turn, brought more work. One job alone paid for the PR person. The rest of the show's Tony winners did nothing but sit around and wait for their award to attract people--that usually doesn't work. These things are quickly forgotten, so one has to milk them while they're hot. The Academy Awards, certainly, were created really to help promote movies. Rewarding perceived accomplishment is a useful way to do it. Most presenters are people with upcoming films, etc. I'm sure the Grammys are the same. So if you win one and don't promote, then really you are failing the Academy. ;-) Of course, Harry Smith won one for lifetime achievement for the Anthology of American Folk Music and died soon thereafter, so occasinally some good things happen. So you're saying it's a good thing Harry Smith is dead? Yikes, I am. Bad writing. I shall fix. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danasgoodstuff Posted February 10, 2006 Report Share Posted February 10, 2006 I thought it was no worse than usual and I don't see/hear what some people like in John Legend, did nothing at all for me. I think they should give just one lifetime award per show and all the performers whould have to pay tribute. Make it more of a challenge... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RDK Posted February 10, 2006 Report Share Posted February 10, 2006 I think they should give just one lifetime award per show and all the performers should have to fight for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.