Cybergrass Bluegrass Music News: What is Wrong with Bluegrass Grammy Nominations?

Bob_Cherry wrote: on Dec. 05, 2009:
Every year we are stunned by the nominations for bluegrass albums, songs and artists that the Grammy's come up with. This year is no exception. Only one full-time bluegrass artist in the running. Obviously, NARAS voters don't have a clue about bluegrass music and, probably many other genres as well. How the nominations for bluegrass awards are even derived is a dark mystery to us. The nominations are most certainly not from members who understand, follow or know bluegrass music. It must be something else.

This year's bluegrass GRAMMY® nominations are Rhonda Vincent -- the only true bluegrass artist in the running, Bryan Sutton & Friends -- an artist with a good reputation in the bluegrass community, Michael Martin Murphey -- a cowboy/country artist, Jim Lauderdale who has a keen interest in bluegrass and comedian Steve Martin who's The Crow album did get good reviews.

But where are the winners of the International Bluegrass Music Association's (IBMA) award winners? Where are the top bluegrass acts for the Society for the Preservation of Bluegrass Music of America (SPBGMA), the bluegrass artists from the Americana Music Association or the Roots Music Association? They are sadly not even in the running. Even those artists found in the Billboard and Bluegrass Unlimited charts don't make the cut with the nominations. That's right -- most of the top bluegrass music artists in the country are not to be found in the GRAMMY® bluegrass music nominations. It is the same every year. With the exception of Rhonda Vincent and the Rage, bluegrass is not to be found among bluegrass nominations.

This creates a problem for the genre and a bigger credibility issue for the National Academy of Recording Arts & Sciences, also known as The Recording Academy or NARAS. When non-bluegrass talent is the best that NARAS can come up with for the genre, it is obvious that those doing the nominating don't know the genre. This greatly diminishes the value of the bluegrass awards and renders them close to meaningless.

By the same token, the awards have been very kind to one particular bluegrass/acoustic/roots artist -- Alison Krauss. Krauss has amassed 26 Grammy Awards, making her the most awarded female artist (and the third most awarded artist overall) in Grammy history.

If bluegrass is having a problem with NARAS recognizing the genre's primary artists, then what about the other minor genres? Are these awards even relevant in these genres? In my opinion, not really. For an award to be relevant and credible, it must truly represent the genre that the award is named for. Unfortunately, when it comes to the GRAMMY® awards and bluegrass, this is seldom the case at all. While a few bluegrass artists like Cherryholmes, Rhonda Vincent, and Del McCoury do make the roster, the reason seems to be more based on name recognition than on any element of real achievement. At least, this is the impression that NARAS leaves by their selections and nominations.

What can bluegrass to to save itself from this misrepresentation? Probably the single most important element would be for more bluegrass artists, producers, songwriters and labels getting involved. Getting involved also means making the financial commitment to become members of the association. While probably not enough would join to make a significant change, the impact of just some of those "in the know" as voting members would certainly help in restoring some element of credibility to the nominations process. Until then, we will just have to live with whatever and whoever the academy comes up with.

Seed Newsvine

Copyright 1992-2010 by CYBERGRASS® CYBERGRASS® is a Registered Trademark. All use and rights are reserved. No part of this site may be copied or reproduced in whole or in part without express written authorization from CYBERGRASS®. Derivitive works prohibited.