base talk Is Grammy bait album a thing?

[piotrert]

There are always talks about Oscar bait movies. Does the same thing apply to Grammys? Do artists construct their albums in order to maximize their chance to win AOTY? Can we determine patterns in past winners that could help predict which album has the biggest chance to win?

 

Once someone mentioned that voters don't like long albums (in the sense of number of tracks), and it kind of tracks for the winners in this century. Out of last 25 winners:

 

10x - 13 tracks

3x - 11/14 tracks

2x - 9/12/16 tracks

1x - 10/19/40 tracks

 

So on average perfect album that wins has 13 tracks and rarely has more than 16 (two outliers: movie soundtrack from 2002 (19 tracks) and double album from 2004 (40 tracks))

 

Looking at this year nominees:

 

Brat - 15 tracks

Cowboy Carter - 27 tracks (or fewer? don't know if interludes were submitted)

Djesse Vol. 4 - 16 tracks

Hit Me Hard and Soft - 10 tracks

New Blue Sun - 8 tracks

The Rise and Fall of a Midwest Princess - 14 tracks

Short n' Sweet - 12 tracks

The Tortured Poets Department - 16 tracks

 

Of course it's not perfect picture. To be more rigorous, one needs to check all nominees from past 25 years and verify if longer albums are in fact less favorable to win, or maybe they just occur rarely, and their win rate isn't even worse than shorter albums.

 

Are there any other characteristics that could be categorized as Grammy bait?

[JO1s]

TTPD is obviously Grammy bait.

[Cloröx]

21, 25, 30 are pure definition of Grammy bait albums

[Kill Me]

Yes, they sound like albums from the 70s or 80s which the boomer voters jizz over because "Old music = good, new music = bad".

Adele/Amy/Norah's jazzy bluesy albums are catnip to them.

Bruno is yet to lose a Grammy nom since he started doing his retro shtick.

[OrgVisual]

I mean yes, that's why Taylor came up with these Midnight 3AM edition and TTPD: Anthropology because she doesn't want the album to be perceived as a lengthy incoherent mess full of filler tracks (while still want those extra tracks to be counted for the charts)

Edited 7 hours ago by OrgVisual

[Dialamba]

Billie is taking it anyway 

[Radical Pessimism]

1 hour ago, Cloröx said:

21, 25, 30 are pure definition of Grammy bait albums

21 seemed more organic to me at least because the album blew up after she performed at the Brits Award in 2011. 

25 and 30 are made for the awards, well at least 25 is a great album.

[HarajukuPrincess]

Feel like either 3 Stacks or Billie will take it. 

[Venice B]

I think they are a thing but not as common as oscar bait movies.

 

There's also a difference between talented artists that always make good albums and are nominated (H.E.R. for example) but others like that Jacob Collier guy... his albums are total grammy baits imo. 

 

I don't think Adele albums are grammy baits though, she just plays very safe which they seem to like. But it's her brand so...

[byzantium]

Not quite to the same degree.  In film, being an "Oscar film" was more lucrative and people would go watch it because it was a prestige film.  So baiting to the Oscar's was a marketing technique.  
 

Winning Grammys is far less lucrative so artists cannot really craft an album just for the Grammys and have a successful career.  
 

To the extent one exists though, those Jon Bellion and Djessie albums are as close as you will get.  

[Feanor]

2 hours ago, OrgVisual said:

I mean yes, that's why Taylor came up with these Midnight 3AM edition and TTPD: Anthropology because she doesn't want the album to be perceived as a lengthy incoherent mess full of filler tracks (while still want those extra tracks to be counted for the charts)

She only submitted the standard versions of those albums to the Grammys.

 

OP: Yes, anything that sounds like music from the 60s/70s/80s aka "retro", cause those were the prime years of the majority of voters, so anyone that panders to that sound is automatically more Grammy friendly.

[UnusualBoy]

People calling Adele's albums grammy bait, that's just her sound, it has nothing to do with her wanting to catch the critics attention.

[OrgVisual]

1 hour ago, Feanor said:

She only submitted the standard versions of those albums to the Grammys.

 

OP: Yes, anything that sounds like music from the 60s/70s/80s aka "retro", cause those were the prime years of the majority of voters, so anyone that panders to that sound is automatically more Grammy friendly.

That's exactly the point I made lol

[Feanor]

26 minutes ago, OrgVisual said:

That's exactly the point I made lol

One would thing Taylor is the only artist in the world to have deluxe tracks with how OTHs demonize her for it. You guys are so bothered by everything she does, you need to make up conspiracy theories behind her every move.

[Green]

folklore

[Oktober Knight]

Why do you think Taylor won so many Grammys?