A TRIBUTE TO BILLIE HOLIDAY

This album hasn't gotten too much hype - I actually just noticed A Tribute To Billie Holiday on iTunes last week. I'm not an expert on her or her era of music.  But I do have lots of her music, and I think her singing was so beautiful, while also being sad.  I think she's one of the greatest singers of all time.  Sinatra was supposedly influenced by her, and I know he sang a lot of the same songs.  I like Billie better.

I downloaded three of the songs.  Shelby Lynne, who is seriously underrated, does "You Changed," and it's excellent. I also checked out Esperanza Spalding's "I'll Look Around" which I love.  I was intrigued by the idea of Babyface singing "Strange Fruit."  While Babyface participated in the "Vote For Change" tour some years ago, he generally hasn't been the most political artist, so I thought this was a very unusual choice for him.  It's cool that he tried it, but I don't think it really works.  No disrespect, it was an interesting choice and a tough song to take on.

Those are the songs that I checked out, and two out of three ain't bad, as the man says.  Boz Scaggs and Deborah Cox are other singers on the album.  I haven't heard their songs yet.  I know a lot of people "hate" on tribute albums. I like the idea of them, and I often enjoy the final results.  My favorite thing about them is the idea that they may lead people to check out the original artist and if some new music fans get turned on to Lady Day because of this collection, then mission accomplished.  

I'M NOT MAD AT ESPERANZA SPALDING!

Over the weekend, music exec Steve Stoute bought a full page ad in the New York Times to post an open letter to Neil Portnow, NARAS and The Grammys. You can read it at The Huffington Post. Stoute is a hip-hop guy, and cites some embarrassing Album of The Year gaffes, including 2001 when Steely Dan beat out Eminem's Marshall Mathers LP and 2008 when Herbie Hancock's Joni Mitchell tribute album beat out Kanye West's Graduation. Clearly he thought that Eminem's Recovery should have won this year, and it was beaten out by Arcade Fire's The Suburbs.

In 2001, I was not yet a NARAS member, but I remember being embarrassed anyway. Steely Dan's Two Against Nature was a surprising nomination to say the least, there was some excitement around the album as it was the group's first in 20 years or something. But I bet if you go to a Steely Dan concert today, their fans aren't calling out for songs from that album. Paul Simon's You're The One was also nominated. That was a really boring album, but I remember thinking that they would split the boomer vote. Also nominated was Beck's Midnite Vultures and Radiohead's Kid A. I figured those would split the white hipster vote and Eminem would win. I don't know how that didn't happen, but it certainly was an upset, and I have to think it was an embarrassment.

But not was bad as 2008. I doubt many people even knew that Herbie Hancock had released The Joni Letters. I don't really care about sales, but the record didn't feel like something that was important, and even jazz fans that I know didn't like it.  They felt that the "victory" was actually bad for jazz - the fact that people would be getting the album would ultimately be a turn-off to jazz neophytes, because the album wasn't that interesting. It beat out The Foo Fighters' Echoes, Silence, Patience and Grace (a solid record, but not an Album of the Year type album), Vince Gill's quadruple album These Days (a bit too niche) and, shockingly, Amy Winehouse's Back To Black. I could see Kanye and Amy canceling each other out, but I don't see how Herbie beat the Foo Fighters or Vince Gill. A real gaffe.

This year, Arcade Fire beat Eminem, Lady Antebellum, Lady Gaga and Katy Perry. Now, I voted for Eminem, but I'm not that upset about Arcade Fire. They sort of symbolize the mainstreaming of indie rock, and their album seemed pretty solid. Since Album of the Year was given out at the end of the night, and Arcade Fire was the last performer, Stoute felt it was a set up of some kind. Maybe the producers of the show knew who the winners were, and I agree it's cheap to schedule the show like that. But it's not that big of a deal.

Where I really (respectfully) part ways with the guy is when he makes the case that Justin Bieber should have been Artist of the Year over Esperanza Spalding. He says, "Justin Beiber, an artist that defines what it means to be a modern artist," and says "His cultural impact and success are even more quantifiable if you factor in his YouTube and Vevo viewership - the fact that he was a talent born entirely of the digital age and whose story was crafted in the humble method of being 'discovered' purely for his singing ability (and it should be noted that Justin Bieber plays piano and guitar, as evidenced on his early viral videos)."

I'll add that he also plays drums! There's no doubt in my mind that he's a talented kid. But none of those points make me feel like I should have voted for him as the Best New Artist. Sales are their own reward. So are views on YouTube and Vevo. I won't deny the kid's cultural impact. But I don't think that "biggest" = "best." Although I'm not an "anglophile" I was torn between Florence + The Machine and Mumford & Sons. Both artists have unique sounds, they ignore trends, and both were success stories with impressive sales in 2010. But I have no problem with Esperanza winning - she is also unique, clearly isn't motivated by commercial concerns, and is a good enough musician to have been an instructor at Berkley at age 20. Putting her in a category with Bieber (much less Drake and the other nominees) seems weird, but I have a hard time thinking that she somehow "robbed" Bieber. Agreeing to perform at the Grammys shouldn't be some kind of back-room deal that you are going to win anything, so I disagree with the point that Bieber was somehow "exploited" (the network decides what part of the ceremony they are going to advertise, and using Bieber to get viewers was a no-brainer). I submitted my ballot before I knew who was performing, and I think that was probably the case with most voters.

As Esperanza said in the press room, Justin will probably be fine, and if new people were exposed to her music, then I think the Grammys did us a service. Unless you think her album was bad (as opposed to just "irrelevant" based on sales), I don't see how anyone could have a problem with her victory. At any rate, her next album is going to be produced by Q-Tip, so hopefully people will be more open to hearing that one.

GRAMMY PRE-TELECAST: BETTER THAN THE SHOW?

I always look forward to the Grammys, and, for the past few years, I've enjoyed watching the pre-telecast at Grammy.com. This year, I'll say that the pre-tel (for me) may rival the tv broadcast: there will be performances by some of my favorite nominees, including Buddy Guy, Cyndi Lauper, Trombone Shorty, Mavis Staples and Betty Wright. I wonder if they'll all perform together - that seems like a lot of performances for the pre-tel, and they are all nominated in similar categories. But I'll definitely have it locked, I'm excited to see this.

For the past few years, Tia Carerre hosted the pre-tel (she is usually nominated for Best Hawaiian Music Album, and she is again this year). This year it's Best New Artist nominee Esperanza Spalding with Bobby McFerrin.

Back when I worked at VH1, I used to look forward to covering the Grammy Awards.  This would entail not just covering the regular show, but also the pre-telecast.  Over 100 awards are given out at the Grammys every year, but only about 1/10 are actually on the TV show - the rest are done in the pre-telecast.  For years, you would find out who won some of those awards during the show when they said, "Earlier this evening, so-and-so won the so-and-so Grammy..." and show a picture.  But lots of the coolest awards are given out at the pre-tel.

When I started covering the event, we had an interview room that we shared with Grammy.com (which back then wasn't as much of a priority to NARAS as it is now) so I interviewed anyone who won a Grammy who came through our room, regardless of whether they were of interest to VH1. So, besides getting to talk to some really cool musicians like Steve Earle and Lemmy, I also interviewed Tibetan monks, The Blind Boys of Alabama and Lord Of The Rings score composer Howard Shore. You'll see lesser known jazz, bluegrass, blues, gospel and classical musicians, and they often appreciate the accolades more than the huge stars that win during the regular broadcast. So, if you're around, log on and  catch the pre-tel!