Five Things that Must Be Done to Save Next Year's Grammy Awards

Barring some memorable moments like Lady Gaga being carried onto the red carpet in a luminescent egg by a gaggle of her "monsters," this year's Grammy awards proved to be nearly as disastrous as the year they gave the Best New Artist award to Milli Vanilli. But the disaster didn't come in the form of two lip-syncing Germans with bad dance moves. No, this year disaster struck in the form of absolute and total boredom.

Sure, Christina Aguilera almost feel when she was getting off-stage but this hasn't been her year what with the Super Bowl lyrics fiasco and the unfortunate dissolution of her marriage. But come on people, get off her back. She is human and even though she should have been a bit more prepared, how many Americans do you know that can recite the national anthem off the top of their heads? Besides, wasn't starring in "Burlesque" punishment enough?

One of my main problems with the show was how horrible most of the performers sounded when I was watching it on TV. The sound mixing might have been perfect at the show but from my living room it was muddled, fuzzy and difficult to sit through.

There were also no performances this year that made my hair stand up on my arms like in years past such as when Pink performed "Glitter in the Air" in 2010. Another performance highlight was Mary J. Blige's emotionally explosive performance of "No More Drama" a few years ago.

This year, when I was watching Lady Gaga's performance of her controversial hit "Born This Way," I wasn't struck by any resemblance to a Madonna song but rather I was left wondering why she sounded like she was singing from the bottom of a well. That song and Lady Gaga deserve better. In fact, all of the performers should be angry with the Grammy's for essentially ruining their performances.

And let's face it, that's why people watch. It's definitely not to hear people give boring acceptance speeches where they thank God right after they thank their agent. But even beyond this, there were further issues. Here are five things I think the Grammy's must do to become relevant again to viewers.

Make it More Fun To Watch

Why does it always feel like you are sitting in a stuffy college lecture when you are watching the Grammy's? Different genres have their own appeal but more focus on performances and less time on less than relevant musical styles (like Bluegrass) would be great for the televised broadcast.

Now, this next idea may be controversial but I say that if an artist isn't performing that year or has already performed they should be allowed to drink. The Golden Globes are only fun to watch because everyone is drinking. It's the perfect way to liven up the occasion.

Change the Voting System

Now, I admit the Lady Antebellum song "Need You Know" is catchy and I enjoy listening to it but there was not anything about that song that merited an award for extreme excellence. It could be rewarded for being extremely retro, perhaps, as I swear I heard something like it coming out of the AM radio in my mom's Ford Pinto in the 1970's as a child.

Also, some cellist beat out Florence + The Machine for best new artist? Even Justin Bieber seems more deserving. Shouldn't part of the "Best New Artist" award concept be that this person made an indelible impression on the music world as a whole? How many people listen to cellists?

Try Nominating People Who Weren't Popular 30 Years Ago or That No One's Heard of

Simply put, the rock and metal categories have become a joke. Winners this year included Neil Young, Iron Maiden, Jeff Beck and Paul McCartney for a cover of "Helter Skelter." So, if covers can be nominated, why was "Glee" not nominated more often?

The cast of Glee's performance of "Don't Stop Believin'" lost out to Train for Train's own "live" cover of "Hey, Soul Sister" in the Best Pop Duo/Group Performance category. This is all ironic to me considering that song sucked until Darren Criss from "Glee" recently covered it on the TV show.

And I have no idea who "Arcade Fire" is but their only saving grace in my eyes is that they kept Katy Perry from winning the big Album of the Year award. Honestly, I am not big into rap music (and I love Lady Gaga) but I think Eminem's latest album was a true game changer for the genre.

Different Arrangements for Popular Song Performances

I love that the Grammy's try to mix artists from different genres and have them perform something unique. The Aretha Franklin tribute was very well done even though it seemed inappropriate that people were calling it a "tribute" since she is still alive yet battling cancer.

I have found, however, that one of the best ways to see if a song is truly great or that an artist is truly talented is by having them completely change the arrangement and style of one of their big hits. That way it's also easier to tell that the artist isn't just lip-syncing along to their latest single.

Case in point-Alanis Morissette took her rocking and angry mega-hit "You Oughta Know" one year and turned it into a spare, slow, melodic and string laden ode to a broken heart. She took a song that was all about anger and turned it into a song about sadness. That's true talent and proved that the song was truly worthy of a Grammy.

Attract Some Viewers and Let the Kids from "Glee" Perform

The cast of "Glee" is the only music group managing to sell any records and once they do cover a song, the original becomes an even bigger hit. I realize that they only do covers so they don't qualify for the awards but they are very good live when they have toured so why no performance slot? If the rules don't allow it, change them. The music world is changing and The Grammy's need to seriously try and catch up.

Source: Grammy.com

E!Online.com