Feature
WMC: All that glitters ain’t gold
If music listeners were to closely examine the current landscape of pop music and the charts, they would find the bulk of the singles sounding like dance records. The trend has raised some critical questions amongst music professionals. Are these “dance” records or just crossover singles? What exactly is “dance music?” How do we merit dance music’s popularity in comparison to other musical genres? Courtesy of The Recording Academy, these issues were the basis for a debate during Miami’s 2011 Winter Music Conference.
Think about the Grammy Awards. If an artist, a songwriter, an engineer or a producer wins one, it means he or she is a certified master of music, right? A musical genius? Untouchable? Perhaps they have the best record out that year? No one can deny that such an honor is a seal of approval. Have any of us ever really thought about the process for the Grammy Awards and what we might consider popular music?
Take the dance music categories for example. There are three major awards handed out: Best Remixed Recording, Best Dance Recording and Best Dance/Electronica Album. One would think that heavy synthesizer loops, industrial syncopated drum rhythms, a hit of some congas and percussion, pulsating minimalist melodies and the ability to penetrate the dance floor were enough. Well, it’s not quite as easy as it sounds. While I was soakin’ up some of that good sun on South Beach, I checked out legends Todd Terry, David Morales, Sharam, Paul Harris and Kurosh Nasseri, Esq. on a Mar. 12 panel at Miami Beach Convention Center. Over a few laughs; their raw perspectives and some random catcalls from a few erratic audience members, it was interesting to see another range of musical activism.
Like most music fans, when I was younger, I thought the best artists were great once they won the coveted trophy. It’s clearly not that way; the entertainment business can be very misleading. Whether you watch the ceremony from home or sit in the stands, know that the Grammy Awards are not necessarily a stage production but a political process. Consider a few questions. What does it take to earn a nomination? Why have some of our favorite acts and music professionals won so many of the coveted gold statues? Is winning all merit-based or did someone know someone? Why would some categories or genres get more recognition than others? This will all make sense in a few.
The discussion was a mini-political demonstration – well, minus the protesting and picket signs everywhere. “Not everybody has your ear,” Morales says. “They may not hear something you hear. It’s your ear that makes you who you are. My ear gives me my status.”
Historically, “dance music” has always been in the margins -- questions regarding how the National Academy for Recording Arts & Sciences (NARAS) would formulate criteria for “dance” as a musical genre or if “dance music” was as commercially viable or culturally competent as pop, country, R&B, classical or even hip hop. The dance categories’ predecessor award, Best Disco Recording, was only handed out in 1980 for Gloria Gaynor’s landmark anthem “I Will Survive.” NARAS, in a 1998 Sun Journal article, cited disco in a rejection letter from a previous lobbying effort as “no longer a readily definable separate music form.” It would take another 18 ceremonies before “dance music” would get another chance. Its reincarnation, Best Dance Recording, was first awarded to legendary disco queen, Donna Summer, and dance music producer, Giorgio Moroder, for “Carry On.” Ellyn Harris and her organization, the Committee for Advancement of Dance Music, lobbied for two years to convince NARAS to formally recognize “dance music.” Of course, narrowing down “dance music” is all contingent upon who you ask, what DJ you rely on to get your groove on, what’s on your iPod, if you even still listen to Top 40 radio or even what side of town you would be found partying on Saturday nights. Sometimes, genres intersect. It makes a difference.
Morales -- a DJ, remixer, record producer and former nightclub owner -- believes DJs have a major responsibility to weed out mediocre sounds. He knows a thing or two – he’s one of the most in-demand remixers of all genres and has worked with an incredible range and assortment of recording acts since 1986. “Grammy votes are bullshit,” he says. “I put one and one together and get zero. The people are not voting. These people are a part of NARAS. It’s not what popular; it’s what’s hot based on Soundscan committees. The systems are not fair.” In other cases, when records are being massively produced, not all artists and producers care to have listeners, journalists and critics slap labels on their work or place their music into fixed categories. It can be rather stifling. “We make it as a dance record or as electronic music, but the public makes it a pop record,” Harris, a 2003 Grammy Award recipient for his work with Dirty Vegas on “Days Go By,” says.
Now, let’s play a little musical geography. To date, American artists have won the coveted Grammy for “dance” more than any other artists from any other country. Adding to that fact, the winners are primarily million-selling acts with massive pop charts success to their credit: Madonna (earning the most nominations with five), Cher, Janet Jackson, Britney Spears, Donna Summer, Justin Timberlake (winning two consecutive years) and Lady Gaga. Other countries represented have been the United Kingdom (The Chemical Brothers and Dirty Vegas), France (Daft Punk), Barbados (Rihanna), Australia (Kylie Minogue), The Bahamas (Baha Men) and Italy (Giorgio Moroder). Some would argue that American artists don’t make genuine “dance” records – the nitty gritty pulsating tunes that might not necessarily land on the radio but songs with enough of a rhythm to make listeners thrust and pack the dance floor.
So what is “dance music,” I ask? Dance music can be rather confusing to look at as a whole, I guess, but “dance music” should be allowed just as much range and flexibility as other genres. This is the beauty of music. For example, the panelists opened with their critiques of the Rihanna single, “Only Girl (in the World),” which is the latest recipient of the Best Dance Recording statue. A couple of the panelists told the audience they never played the record on their set lists. I’ve seen the song find lots of magic at various karaoke bars, my female friends’ cell phones, close friends’ iPod playlists and on the dance floors of a few of Atlanta’s gay clubs here and there (actually quite a bit). I’m not saying that Rihanna’s record is or it isn’t “dance” per se, but there is a great disconnect between the panelists’ perceptions and how the song has penetrated with fans. To each is own, I say. The DJs’ choices to not spin Rihanna’s single yielded a great deal of laughter. On the other hand, Rihanna is an accessible artist with massive exposure and chart success. People for the most part are familiar with her – further eliminating the question of whether the song is good or not. “It’s a popularity contest,” Sharam says. “It’s what popular. It’s nothing to do with what’s heard in the clubs or banged out every night.” Terry agrees. “They’re just picking things to fit right in.”
Terry admits that he spends two hours each on an average of three records per day. Known for his remixes for artists such as Annie Lennox; Everything but the Girl; Duran Duran; the Rolling Stones; Michael Jackson and the Jungle Brothers among others, the producer and DJ -- also known as T.N.T. -- knows his style has built a stable fanbase and affords him more opportunities to produce his brand of “dance” music with A-list talent and just good artists in general. He says the songs still count. “Good songs take producers to the next level,” he tells the crowd. “Our songs are what got us here. There are lots of great singers. We got to get them back in the studio and formulate songs.”
Dance music is incredibly diverse – morphing into the cocoons of trance, progressive, dubstep, trip-hop, rave, synth pop, electrofunk, Eurodisco, miscellaneous local rhythms in various countries and maybe even American pop – hell, I don’t know. It’s whatever the listener wants to call it. People do have the power. The problem is that not enough of us know that we can use our authority. It can be rather tedious to sift through immense amounts of submissions: some records misplaced in the wrong categories. Sharam, a former member of the Washington, DC-area NARAS Chapter and one-half of Iranian-American Grammy-winning production duo, Deep Dish, remembers listening for over 12 hours to Johnny Cash remixes. “Who’s gonna do this?” he asks. “There needs to be a better system to weed out all of the BS. I’m asking, ‘What is this?’ This sounds like R&B. Dance was ignored for 20 years; now everyone is jumping on the bandwagon.”
Ramon Wells, chairperson for NARAS’s dance and electronica screening committee, interrupts the panelists briefly to fill in some of the gaps – hippin’ us to some serious hard numbers. There are 17,000 active members (no age requirements), but only 17 actively serve on the screening committee. They listen to the submissions and decide whether the music was solely created for the dance floor. Plus, nominees must have their name on a minimum of six production credits in any capacity. “The members don’t really know dance music,” Wells says. “The process won’t change. They pick the categories to vote for. There are not enough voting members to decide. To 90% of the DJs, it’s a dance record, and records get eliminated. Strength is in numbers, and that’s the only way it will change.” Since this panel, the Grammy Awards has since downsized from 109 categories to 78: taking major cuts in R&B (eight to four), American Roots (nine to five), classical (11 to seven), Latin (seven to four), country (seven to four), rock (seven to four) and pop (eight to four). The dance categories remain untouched.
What more can any of us “dance music” fans expect? The system hasn’t necessarily failed us, but the bureaucracies not being up on trends or knowledgeable about what’s out there is potentially keeping “dance music’s” integrity on life support. “The record business has more wack people than cool people,” Terry says. Sharam adds on that 80% of the music industry is too cool for school – ignoring panels and workshops where the issues are made for public discourse. This sort of conduct will continue to keep voting committees, the supposed “tastemakers,” misinformed about the cultural productions they rate and determine the fate of. Thus, we, the audience, get shafted. However, this treatment is not just in “dance” music but other genres, too. Morales, the 1998 Grammy Award recipient for Remixer of the Year, Non-Classical, sitting propped with his hands under his chin, remembers when singer/songwriter R. Kelly was a major contender for his massive pop hit “I Believe I Can Fly,” going on to earn three awards in 1997. The people in the front row, who he identified as NARAS committee members, didn’t even know who Kelly was.
Quality control is another issue. Dance-influenced sounds now dominate the pop charts and radio – blurring what we may now consider “dance” music into “pop music.” Artists such as Lady Gaga, Usher, Jennifer Lopez, Chris Brown, Ne-Yo and the Black Eyed Peas have become some of the hottest and best-selling pop acts across all musical genres – lately releasing heavier electronic sounds, memorable hooks and catchy melodies that could well serve as club-oriented material. Then, there are those records that are not so good. The Internet and music software programs (i.e. Logic 9, MIDI and FL Studio), all cited by the panelists as the best platforms for “dance” recordings, have allowed new acts and producers to emerge by the masses. They achieve overnight success. Some are not pleased by the paradigm shift in music and technological determinism. “I love the old way because of the quality,” Morales says. “The do it yourself way has distorted the quality of making records. Technology changed for the better and the worse. I know what a good record sounds like. New producers that make beats skip over things they need to learn like how to record vocals.”
It’s no secret that musical directions, in part to technology, have changed significantly. The downward spiral of fiscal and time investments have affected masses of people. Numerous businesses (i.e. record retailers and media outlets) and music professionals were forced out of business. What were once lucrative professions in the music business are now unattainable, unstable, fading out and are getting further in jeopardy. Dance music has experienced its share of crises. The means of producing and mass distribution of music are being renegotiated daily. When asked about longing for the days of vinyl records over MP3 files, Terry responded by stating he didn’t miss carrying it. Morales adds that major record labels, the few in existence, no longer commit to artists and projects. He likes being able to travel and sit in his hotel rooms with his keyboard and a laptop to make a record, so he knows the advantages that come with the new ways of producing “dance” records. There are more Catch 22s to consider. “It’s less time consuming and it’s economical. You had to spend a lot more money. That’s why there is a lot more crap. You had to rent the studio, pay the engineer, hire a keyboard player. The record company had to believe in a record to spend money. It’s a fucking disaster. It’s a joke.”
Now, we as fans and consumers are left to make some decisions about the music that we want. One of the first solutions ideally would be to raise consumer awareness. We have to start utilizing our social networks more to engage in some cyberactivist conversations and less narcissist behavior. Then, we have to keep the dialogue going. There can be an incredible shift in defining who the tastemakers and opinion leaders are, what sounds good will change, what deserves further recognition will alter and how we determine recognition will also switch. Internet radio streams and online music accounts are providing us with incredible music being mass distributed and marketed directly to our listening tastes. The initiative starts with us – the listeners, music professionals, writers, executives, managers and programmers. “We have to lobby to get people to sign up,” Sharam says. “There’s got to be a conversation about what we can do to get more relevant stuff in the nomination pool.”
Making records, discovering them and honoring them can still be an art. Music should always be an experience. The playing field can also be leveled for dance music. The producers certainly still believe there is room for ideas and originality. “Technology is there to enhance you work,” Sharam says. “You can make things work with nothing. Talent is something you can’t upgrade with technology. If you w ant to be at the top of your range, you have to do your homework. You gotta listen to a lot of stuff. To stay up to date, I have to get inspired.”
As long as talent is present, it doesn’t matter how the artist can go about creating timeless music. The same holds true in our understanding of music, not just “dance.” “It doesn’t matter what you have, but you have to make it work,” Morales says.
Words Christopher Daniel
