Quality and the test of time

 

Stevie, take us to some higher ground. Please.

For the second day in a row, I was doing things around the house when my phone buzzed.

For the second day in a row, a friend texted me about a game broadcast they were watching and the broadcasters calling the action.

Same game. Two different people. Neither one knows the other.

Each one had the same conclusion: dreadful. Awful. Terrible. Sophomoric. 

"Unbearable."

After doing a little research last night, I found a link and decided to listen.

Wow.

So when I got the text today, I asked about the crew. Was it the same? Initially, I didn't get the impression that it was. Then I went and watched for myself.

Same. Wow again.

Obviously, I'm being discreet in discussing this but it again highlights the question of how and why some get where they get.

We know there's a low threshold for quality these days, again, it's been noted numerous times that almost anyone (especially with money) can try their hand at broadcasting.

It's heartbreaking, of course.

It's also why I really don't watch or listen to many other broadcasts. I see clips here and there. Friends also send me stuff, whether because they want my blood pressure to spike or to get an opinion.

Either way, mission accomplished.

It happens quite a bit though. "Go watch (team) vs. (team)," they'll say, "and let me know what you think."

Sometimes my reaction is that it's good. Sometimes I add criticism and ways for improvement. 

And then there's dreck like I watched today.

So, maybe Greenwich High School does have the right idea when they had nobody at the mic for their boys basketball playoff game today at GHS. 

There's more. As always, I've said enough.

*****

Thankfully, the interwebs saved me, because I read a tweet that intrigued me. It didn't offend me, to be clear.

Price of Reason

@priceoreason

MUSIC: Billboard Magazine's Paul Grein says that Taylor Swift deserves to win Album of the Year at the Grammy Awards because she's on the level of Stevie Wonder, Paul Simon and Frank Sinatra. I'm not kidding. He really said that!

OK, where to begin? Look, the obvious piece is that the Swifties are weighing in, while others are dumping on Sinatra and Simon. Not shockingly, Stevie Wonder is being left alone. There are a bunch of bad takes in the thread. Let's narrow it down to...

- Swift writes her own songs and Sinatra didn't. This is partially true because Swift also did a bunch of collaborations with pop crafters while Francis Albert worked with skilled conductors and arrangers but was also regarded as perhaps the finest interpreter of music ever in that he was basically an extra arranger.

- Swift has more Grammy's. Er..and? This is a completely ludicrous point, along the lines of "Derek Jeter never won an MVP."

- Simon had "Graceland" and a handful of hits. Which, of course, is laughable and not worth expanding on.

- Then came the gender topic and I'm not sticking around for that. We can add plenty of women here (Aretha and Ella Fitzgerald and Billie Holiday and Joni Mitchell and Carole King and Stevie Nicks and do I need to continue?).

Let's get to it. Swift is talented. Very. A terrific songwriter and performer. Also a savvy marketer of her image. And she manipulates the market with countless "extra special" versions of her albums, making it very difficult for people to collect her music.

(Thankfully The Beatles weren't a part of this discussion and maybe Sinatra shouldn't be either because Sinatra and the lads are, frankly, on another level. Yes. I said it.)

Stevie Wonder is brilliant, no question, but if we're being perfectly honest, didn't we get to "I Just Called to Say I Love You" and realize it was basically over? That song hardly stood with literally everything he did before that and I pretty much revere Stevie.

So, for whatever you might think, I'm not on the front porch tearing trying to get poor little Taylor off my lawn. I'm more than giving her whatever due is deserved.

The one point that I do think is salient is I wonder if she has that timeless appeal.

Now, don't get me wrong, we'll hear about her again and again as these things are cyclical, and again she's a marketing machine, but will the music truly stand up? I'm not comparing here but every now and again there will be some nostalgic buzz about one performer or another (pick them -- they all count) and then the hangover passes and it goes right back onto the discount shelf.

Swift won't be on the discount shelf but will we still be talking about her like that? Honestly, are we talking about Madonna that way? Does that music still hold up?

Again, and I can't make this any clearer, I'm actually not tearing anyone or anything down here. This isn't in my wheelhouse of things to destroy as I've actually become more kinder and gentler (and quieter) as I've gotten older.

OK, except for JC Mellenwhatever. 

And UB40.

And Maroon 5 (that's for John Nash).

And while Journey is like a ham sandwich -- completely benign and mostly worth ignoring -- why are they so renowned? Simple: much like a particular New Jersey-based outfit or two, they write singalongs that hit a particular zeitgeist and create a cult-like following. Mostly harmless.

Eventually, you learn to leave the cult or drink the Flavor Aid (it wasn't Kool-Aid).

One could put Dave Matthews there, and I like Dave Matthews (maybe not as much as I used to, but still).

Is Tay Tay like that also?

That's the thing. It's all subjective. 

Only time will tell. (Oh, sorry. That's Asia.)

Speaking of Time (Alan Parson Project? Pink Floyd?) don't forget to spring ahead tonight.