Should the Grammys’ Best New Artist Category Still Be Tied to Albums?

(photo: Logo TV)

Meghan Trainor is the frontrunner to win the Grammy for Best New Artist on Feb. 15. You may remember that Trainor was a finalist for Record and Song of the Year last year for her breakthrough smash, “All About That Bass.” So, why is she considered “New” this year?

That’s a good question. The Best New Artist category is tied to the release of full-length albums (or EPs consisting of five or more songs). Trainor’s first major-label album, Title, was released in January 2015.

If Trainor wins Best New Artist, the award will come 17 months after “All About That Bass” rocketed to #1, 15 months after she performed the song on the CMA Awards (in tandem with Miranda Lambert), and 12 months after she was nominated in two of the four marquee Grammy categories.

If an act is nominated for two of the biggest and most prestigious Grammy Awards, it seems safe to say he or she have established an identity as a recording artist. Pretty much by definition. By insisting that artists must release a full-length album to be considered for Best New Artist, the Grammys are clinging to an old-fashioned notion.

The industry has for years been moving from a long period in which the album was paramount to an era in which the song is again king. People in the music industry may lament that trend, but to deny that it is happening just makes such naysayers seem out of touch.

I would say that Hozier (who was also eligible for a Best New Artist nomination this year, though he didn’t get one) also established his identity in 2014, when “Take Me to Church” became a #2 hit. And Ed Sheeran established his identity in late 2012 (which fell into the 2013 Grammy eligibility year) when “The A Team” became a top 20 hit. And Bruno Mars established his identity in 2010, when he had three smash hits, including two #1s: B.o.B’s “Nothin’ on You,” on which he was prominently featured, and his own “Just the Way You Are."

All three of those artists received Grammy nominations in one of the "Big Four” categories in their breakout year. Mars was nominated for Record of the Year. Sheeran and Hozier were nominated for Song of the Year. But none of them were eligible for Best New Artist that year because their albums hadn’t been released by the end of the eligibility period.

The same thing happened this year to Charlie Puth. Wiz Khalifa’s “See You Again,” on which Puth is prominently featured, logged 12 weeks at #1 last year. Puth was nominated for three Grammys (including Song of the Year) for his work on the song. He was even nominated for a Golden Globe. Puth has returned to the top 30 as a lead artist with “Marvin Gaye,” featuring Trainor, and the current “One Call Away.” Puth would have been a strong contender for Best New Artist this year, but his debut album, Nine Track Mind, didn’t make the Sept. 30 deadline. It was released on Jan. 29. (Puth had a four-song EP last year, but releases have to consist of five or more songs to be considered an album.)

Fetty Wap was eligible for Best New Artist this year (though he, like Hozier, was passed over for a nom), because his debut album was released in the final week of this eligibility year. If his album had been released one week later, he would not have been eligible until next year. The massive success of Fetty’s #2 smash “Trap Queen” (and the top 10 success of his two follow-up hits, “679” and “My Way”) is what established his public identity. The success of the album was just the icing on the cake.

The Grammys should reconsider their insistence that an artist has to have an album out, or they’ll increasingly be running a year behind their audience.
The counter-argument is that the extra time gives the committee of Grammy insiders which determines the nominees in the top four categories more of a chance to see which artists blossom and which struggle following their initial hit. This Grammy year, for example, Trainor has had a succession of four top 20 hits, while Hozier has yet to return to the Hot 100 following his breakthrough smash.

The Grammys could still, as a general rule, prefer to wait for an album to evaluate an artist, but they should give themselves the option to “fast-track” an artist who has made an undeniable impact with an initial single or singles. Waiting a full year for an act to be considered for Best New Artist just doesn’t cut it in such a fast-paced industry.

I have a post-script: Puth will be eligible to compete for Best New Artist next year — unless he wins a Grammy in one of the three categories in which he is nominated this year. (The rules disqualify Grammy-winners from competing for Best New Artist.) So if Puth goes 0 for 3 on Feb. 15 (which is likely, given the competition in those categories), he can at least console himself with the fact that he has preserved his eligibility in the Best New Artist category for next year. (These rules get mighty complicated, as you can see.)