THE GRAMMYS

Adele, Bon Iver, and Jay-Z Get Their Night at the Grammys

by Matt Ashare The Burg, February 8

Can Justin Vernon as Bon Iver be this year's Arcade Fire?

Once upon a time, there may have actually been a certain logic to the Grammys. Back when the record business was fairly well centralized, radio was the dominant medium for song consumption, and a defined notion of what constituted the pop mainstream existed, it presented an opportunity for the organization that runs the awards — the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences (NARAS) — to put its best face, or faces, forward. And, as with the Oscars, there was a measure of predictability when it came to who got the big nominations. But those days are long past. And nothing in recent memory illustrated that more vividly than the closing moments of last year's 53rd annual Grammy Awards show, when an unconventional indie-rock band from Toronto, the Arcade Fire, beat out multi-platinum rapper Eminem, pop princess Katy Perry, and a pair of Ladies — Antebellum and Gaga — for Album of the Year, on a night when tween sensation Justin Bieber was mercifully upset by jazz artist Esperanza Spalding in the Best New Artist category.

         So, yes, in spite of expected multiple wins by marquee stars (Eminem, Jay-Z, John Legend, and the above mentioned Ladies), as well as a few respectful nods in the direction of legacy artists (Paul McCartney and Neil Young), it was something of a watershed moment for an institution that hasn't always had a particularly good reputation for keeping up with the times. After all, the Grammys were famously slow on the uptake with hip-hop. And NARAS has endured some rather shameful moments in the past couple decades: a depleted Jethro Tull beating out Metallica for Best Hard Rock/Metal honors in 1989; Nirvana's "Smells Like Teen Spirit" losing to professor Eric Clapton's MTV unplugged recording of "Layla" for Best Rock Song in ‘92; and Steely Dan's Two Against Nature prevailing over Radiohead's OK Computer and Eminem's admittedly controversial The Marshall Mathers LP in 2000.

         All of which has made handicapping the 54th Grammys, which air this Sunday night on CBS, something of a crap shoot. Will the Arcade Fire win of 2011 truly mark the start of a trend? Or will NARAS voters, cowed by angry Bieberheads, take a more measured, conservative approach when they cast their ballots? On the surface, at least, the list of nominees suggests it could go either way.

         Not surprisingly, rap superstar Kanye West goes into the night as an odds-on favorite with seven nominations. Then again, Eminem had a full ten last year, and only walked away with two. It should also be noted, with appropriate bemusement, that Kanye's in the paradoxical position of being up against himself for Best Rap Album, with his My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy sparring with his Jay-Z collab Watch the Throne for Rap Album of the Year. (Unless I've got the math wrong, that means the most he can win is six.) Of course, Kanye's got a bit of a checkered past when it comes to awards shows (see: Taylor Swift), and, for all of his obvious talent and industry power, he is not quite the kind of role model NARAS tends to prefer. So don't be surprised if, like Eminem, he only comes away with a pair of victories.

         If there is anything close to a sure bet this year, it's gotta be British soulstress Adele, a critic's darling with a clean record, six nominations, and the right profile to be a Grammy poster girl. Her 21 may very well leave Lady Gaga high and dry in the Album of the Year category for the second year running. But thanks to some major changes in some major categories, Adele's going to face stiff competition not just from Lady Gaga, but also from seasoned songwriter-turned-pop star Bruno Mars in a category like Best Pop Solo Performance because this year NARAS has done away with separate slates for male and female artists. And Mars, along with the alt-rocking Foo Fighters, also has six nominations.

         But the most intriguing prospect for the kind shock and awe the Arcade Fire brought to last year's show comes by way of another indie upstart, the artist known as Bon Iver (a/k/a Justin Vernon). Vernon is in the running for four Grammys — Best Song, Best Record, Best New Artist, and Best Alternative Album. It's a long shot, but if Adele and Mars split the pop vote for Best Song, Bon Iver's "Holocene" could come out on top. And since Vernon wrote "Holocene" himself, the same could happen in the Best Record category. He's got the curvaceous Nicki Minaj to contend with if he's to take Best New Artist. And he's up against Radiohead's King of Limbs for Best Alternative Album, although Radiohead have got other opportunities (Best Rock Performance and Best Rock Song).

         Which leads me to some of the more perplexing aspects of this year's Grammy nominations — yes, more perplexing than the distinction between Best Record and Best Album. What makes Radiohead more "alternative" than Wilco, whose The Whole Love is stuck in Best Rock Album with Jeff Beck's Rock 'n' Roll Party Honoring Les Paul (seriously?), as well as discs by Foo Fighters and the Red Hot Chili Peppers? If Beck's disc wins that one, it may amount to another Jethro Tull oops. It's also unfortunate that the Black Keys, who released the best album of their career last year, have to compete with a collaboration between the legendary Tony Bennett and the late Amy Winehouse in Best Pop Duo/Performance. I mean, really, do the Black Keys as a pop duo? And, while I had been hoping that the Decemberists might enjoy a much deserved Arcade Fire moment this year, that's just not the way it's looking to pan out. They got some props — Best Rock Performance and Best Rock Song for "Down By the Water." And maybe they'll best Coldplay, Foo Fighters, and Radiohead in one of the two. But, as Sunday approaches, I beginning to think NARAS could do worse than asking the Arcade Fire back for a reprise of last year's closing credits.

To Be or Not to Be a Radiohead Fan

http://www.the-burg.com/blogit/entry/music_review_radiohead_get_back_to_business_on_king_of_limbs

Music review: Radiohead Get Back to Business on “King of Limbs”

The Burg Staff on Mar. 02, 2011
By Matt Ashare
When we last heard from them, Radiohead — that enigmatic big little band from England — seemed bent on shaking up a business model that had stood since the dawn of vinyl. With no label support, the group invited fans to pay what they wished in 2007 for a download of “In Rainbows.” The strategy also served as an effective marketing campaign, as cultural pundits scrambled to grasp the meaning of it all. Inevitably, perhaps, the music was overshadowed by media static.
  Sitting here now, with an actual CD of “In Rainbows” nestled on a shelf next to the band’s 1993 debut, “Pablo Honey” (“Creep” anyone?) and “OK Computer,” the bold, guitar-driven 1997 album that established Radiohead as a major musical force — a subtler but no less cerebral Pink Floyd, or maybe a less overtly political heir to U2’s grand guitarscapes, with singer Thom Yorke cast as the digital age’s reigning king of pain — two thoughts come to mind. For all its airy synth textures, electro-beats, and disembodied vocals, “In Rainbows” is far more accessible, and enjoyable, than I remember. More importantly, while its original mode of distribution seemed to challenge conventional notions of what music is worth, in the end Radiohead profited from an old-school paradigm: the download, like the bygone vinyl single, was simply a loss leader — a tease — for an $80 “In Rainbows” deluxe edition, and that handsome CD on my shelf. Radiohead simply put a new twist on the tried and true.
  They’re at it again. After abruptly announcing on Valentine’s Day that a new Radiohead album, “King of Limbs,” would be available as a download the following Saturday, the band created a bigger stir by delivering the “disc” a day early. “Limbs” didn’t benefit from the big build-up to “Rainbows,” but it created a stir nonetheless. Forthcoming, in late April or early May: Vinyl and CD, as well as a deluxe “newspaper” version featuring two 10-inch vinyl disc, a CD, and over 600 pieces of “artwork.”
  With eight tracks that fly by in under 40 minutes, “Limbs” feels even more like a loss leader than “Rainbows.” Longer than most EPs, but shorter than an LP, perhaps it’s meant to suggest that, in the age of downloads and digital media services like Pandora, those analog-era designations are no longer useful. And, yet, “Limbs” does have something akin to the ebb and flow of an “album.” The first half — yes, I’m finally going to mention the music — is flush with du-jour dubstep rhythms.
  The fluttering piano the introduces the first track, “Bloom,” quickly gives way to a rushed beat that feels like it’s tripping over itself and Colin Greenwood’s nearly subsonic bass (no guitars in sight). Yorke’s apparitional voice is front and center, but the only lyric I can make out is “Open your mouth wide/Universal sigh.”
  Typical Yorke: at once inscrutable and evocative.
  Guitarists Johnny Greenwood and Ed O’Brien arrive with an insistent scratch of a riff on “Morning Mr. Magpie,” and insinuate “Little By Little” with a bit of melodic interplay.
But it’s back to scattershot drums ‘n’ bass for the wordless exercise “Feral.” And then, viola!, the white lab coats come off and we’re back on quasi-familiar ground: the piano chords of “Codex” carry faint echoes of “Karma Police”; “Lotus Flower” has the verse/chorus structure of a potential single; acoustic guitars ground “Give Up the Ghost”; and for all his mumbling, Yorke doesn’t stumble over the key line of the final track, “Separator.” With guitars swarming like pixies around his spectral falsetto, he warns, or promises, “If you think this is over, then you’re wrong.”
  The album as unending project: a business model for the 21st century.