3ku1
Member
Posts: 3,009
Location:
|
Post by 3ku1 on Feb 16, 2016 16:18:37 GMT -5
More thoughts on Gaga performance. Since I've only stanned one musician I have to bring it back to him. This Gaga/Bowie performance was most like Adam's FYE AMAs performance. Both were overstaged, overthought, over wrought, over caricaturized, over hyped. I don't know that at award shows if anyone is safe from trying to be over the top and even our Adam the last time he did an award show tribute - EMAs with Queen was over the top and trying to hard. That's why things didn't "click" until the Ihearts. Over the top? I don't know... that EMAs performance was the very first time I saw Adam sing (as a big Freddie fan thinking there was no way someone/anyone but him could sing Queen songs, never). And Adam did it! He won me over immediately. He was brilliant! I didn't find that performance over the top. Not at all. I loved it. In my opinion things didn't click until the Ihearts because Adam just needed to get used the fact he was singing with such legends as Brian and Roger and relax. It took some time. Anyway to me, he was perfect since the very beginning. That Smgo one of the greatest live performances of all time. It truley established Adam. It changed everything for him. That's why its very important to have his kinda connections in the industry.
|
|
|
Post by adamrocks on Feb 16, 2016 16:25:03 GMT -5
Yolandi @yolandik29 2h2 hours ago @adamlambert .....like a fine wine, only gets better over the year's....#Glamberts #BestFanArmy #iheartawards
|
|
|
Post by enchanted on Feb 16, 2016 16:28:37 GMT -5
Sorry Nile, I don't want to watch that again ever, I got more than enough last night!
|
|
|
Post by pi on Feb 16, 2016 16:31:41 GMT -5
|
|
3ku1
Member
Posts: 3,009
Location:
|
Post by 3ku1 on Feb 16, 2016 16:32:20 GMT -5
I think if Adam hypothetically did the tribute. He would of shown more soul. Which was missing. He wouldn't of come across as a personater. He would of put his unique twist on it. Brought the house down. And become a household name. But alas.
|
|
|
Post by adamrocks on Feb 16, 2016 16:42:38 GMT -5
Interesting article. MsDylangirl @msdylangirl 7h7 hours ago The Grammy voting process is completely ridiculous www.vox.com/2015/2/4/7976729/grammy-voting-process?utm_campaign=vox&utm_content=article%3Afixed&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter … via @voxdotcom
The Grammy voting process is completely ridiculous
Updated by Kelsey McKinney on February 15, 2016, 3:49 p.m. The Grammys are the second-most popular awards show broadcast after only the Oscars. And unlike the Oscars, they're only growing in popularity. But while lots of people tune in to watch, they often seem to mostly be checking out the high-octane performances. The winners often seem disconnected from musical reality. Ostensibly, the awards honor "artistic achievement, technical proficiency and overall excellence in the recording industry, without regard to album sales or chart position." But if you watch the Grammys, you know "album sales or chart position" seem to help far more than actual artistic quality. Those climbing the stairs to hold those golden gramophones are more likely to be Top 40 superstars than the top musicians and artists working. Some of the best musicians ever — Bob Marley, Diana Ross, Jimi Hendrix — never won an award, even with the 83 (yes, 83) competitive categories the Grammys hand out awards in. But there's one big reason these winners can be so terrible and probably will be for the foreseeable future: The nominations and voting process is a mess. Here's how you can win a Grammy. Read more: www.vox.com/2015/2/4/7976729/grammy-voting-process
|
|
|
Post by pi on Feb 16, 2016 16:50:41 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by adamrocks on Feb 16, 2016 16:55:29 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by adamrocks on Feb 16, 2016 16:58:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by pi on Feb 16, 2016 17:01:57 GMT -5
|
|