Taylor Swift's re-recordings could earn her new Grammys

[Jordan Miller]

In an effort to take ownership over her own work, Taylor Swift plans on re-recording and re-releasing all of her past works previously under Big Machine Label.

She just dropped the first taste: "Love Story." Fearless is slated for an April release. 

Billboard confirms that these re-recordings are eligible for new Grammy awards. 

Quote

A Recording Academy spokesperson says “Current eligibility guidelines would allow for the new performances and albums to be eligible if they were recorded within the last five years. However, none of the older songs would be eligible for songwriting awards.”

Fearless (Taylor’s Version) will include six “never-before-released songs from the vault." Would those songs be eligible?

According to the Academy, the new performances would be eligible in performance categories if they were recorded within the last five years. The songs would be eligible in songwriting categories if they are new songs (previously unreleased in any form).

We love to see her dominance

Exhale, do you think it's fair Taylor can receive new Grammy nominations for past works? Sound off in the comments. 

 

Related:

[Blackout2006]

I'm getting tired of seeing her everywhere  Seethe away Tayrat 

[RadicalOptimism]

No it’s not fair and her being able to chart again is not fair either. They should not allow this. It’s her prerogative to re-record and reap the earnings, but I’m truly curious to see if she would even bother if she couldn’t chart again. Like if Billboard made a rule change that you can’t chart again with a re-recording then I highly doubt she would’ve bothered. I know I’ll get flack for this, but it’s the truth. 

[carlosallauca]

how boring music must be for the Grammy's to even consider nominate a 12 years old song.

[CindyTheTVisLeaking]

Taylor, sweetie, 2020 was hard enough 

stop torturing us we have suffered so much  

[Popcornie]

11 minutes ago, CrazyButItFeelsAllright said:

No it’s not fair and her being able to chart again is not fair either. They should not allow this. It’s her prerogative to re-record and reap the earnings, but I’m truly curious to see if she would even bother if she couldn’t chart again. Like it Billboard made a rule change that you can’t chart again with a re-recording then I highly doubt she would’ve bothered. I know I’ll get flack for this, but it’s the truth. 

Earning new grammies for re recordings is odd to me and I agree that its a bit unfair. But her old albums being able to chart again is not unfair on any degree. Some of her albums are still on the chart and these are kind of rerelases of the albums and technically they are the same album. Also she would re record the album because as she has made very clear its not for the charts, but for her to be able to own her music, use her music in commercials and movies and have complete control over what she does with it, without someone like Scooter profiting from it or trying to deny her rights to use the music. If the record sells it deserves to chart as much as any other re-release or album. Its not that big of a deal if her old albums start charting again though some of them still are charting like 1989 and rep. 

[thebritmaster]

Makes sense but no they’re not going to give her a Grammy for the re-recordings 

The real question is how many Grammys will ~new~ Satisying win? 

[Blackout2006]

20 minutes ago, CrazyButItFeelsAllright said:

No it’s not fair and her being able to chart again is not fair either. They should not allow this. It’s her prerogative to re-record and reap the earnings, but I’m truly curious to see if she would even bother if she couldn’t chart again. Like it Billboard made a rule change that you can’t chart again with a re-recording then I highly doubt she would’ve bothered. I know I’ll get flack for this, but it’s the truth. 

This

[redacted statement]

charting = fair

getting a SCAMMY = unfair

[Look But Don't Touch]

I hate her tbh. She seems so thirsty for records, Grammys, numbers etc. Just like Beyonce when they are both extremely boring 

[TSmidnighTS]

I think it's odd that they are able to qualify for Grammys, although I DO wish Red would get the long overdue credit that it deserves. More than that, I want folklore to get the Grammy it deserves though. Folklore was such an incredible album and I don't want people to forget them and pretend like they weren't amazing. Her songwriting on those albums is top notch. So give her a AOTY for folklore, and I'll be happy. Let them chart however they can though. She isn't doing this for charts.

[LeglessJamie]

43 minutes ago, CrazyButItFeelsAllright said:

No it’s not fair and her being able to chart again is not fair either. They should not allow this. It’s her prerogative to re-record and reap the earnings, but I’m truly curious to see if she would even bother if she couldn’t chart again. Like it Billboard made a rule change that you can’t chart again with a re-recording then I highly doubt she would’ve bothered. I know I’ll get flack for this, but it’s the truth. 

exactly why isn't it fair it charts again?

Madonna re-released "Holiday" (100% the same song whereas Taylor's new recordings have new vocals) 3 times. It charted 3 times.

Re-releases such as "Glory" also have the chance to chart again and that only came with 2 new songs while Tyalor's Fearless will have at least 6 never heard before tracks. I mean unless you think that those releases shouldn't count either, you would be extremely biased cause it's Taylor.

 

[RadicalOptimism]

33 minutes ago, Popcornie said:

Earning new grammies for re recordings is odd to me and I agree that its a bit unfair. But her old albums being able to chart again is not unfair on any degree. Some of her albums are still on the chart and these are kind of rerelases of the albums and technically they are the same album. Also she would re record the album because as she has made very clear its not for the charts, but for her to be able to own her music, use her music in commercials and movies and have complete control over what she does with it, without someone like Scooter profiting from it or trying to deny her rights to use the music. If the record sells it deserves to chart as much as any other re-release or album. Its not that big of a deal if her old albums start charting again though some of them still are charting like 1989 and rep. 

Her old albums she recorded under her old label should absolutely still be able to chart. Her re-recordings should NOT. At the end of the day, she’s still getting the chart positions of her old albums whether or not she owns the masters. Why should she get two #1s for what is essentially the same album minus a few tweaks? 

[LeglessJamie]

7 minutes ago, BabkaAutorka said:

I hate her tbh. She seems so thirsty for records, Grammys, numbers etc. Just like Beyonce when they are both extremely boring 

why? She literally didn't DO ANYTHING to promote Folklore or Evermore or even Love Story. She released 1 single of Folklore and Evermore and only performed "Betty" (once) and then left it for what it was.

How in any way, does that make her seem thirsty????????????????????

The re-recordings also are not cause of numbers but because she wants to get back at the people that hurt her. She wants to OWN her own music. 

 

Your comment is the same as what happened to Britney in 2007. Yet, here we are, all fighting and tweeting "we are sorry Britney" but at the same time you're like "I hate Taylor".  We are literally dragging people for saying they hate Britney back then, what makes it justified for you to say the same thing but about Taylor. 

[RadicalOptimism]

2 minutes ago, IForgotYouExisted said:

exactly why isn't it fair it charts again?

Madonna re-released "Holiday" (100% the same song whereas Taylor's new recordings have new vocals) 3 times. It charted 3 times.

Re-releases such as "Glory" also have the chance to chart again and that only came with 2 new songs while Tyalor's Fearless will have at least 6 never heard before tracks. I mean unless you think that those releases shouldn't count either, you would be extremely biased cause it's Taylor.

 

You’re talking about releasing the same song. This is re-recording the same songs. It’s not fair. Her old songs should still be allowed to chart, but not these. I don’t get why y’all are pressed. Isn’t the gist of it to give her the profits? She’s still getting the money from these sales. She shouldn’t get more chart records just because there is an entire gimmick campaign around her not owning her masters. This is about her wanting to chart and not because she truly cares she doesn’t own her work. If Billboard came out and said sorry you’re not charting I bet you anything we won’t see Speak Now or any of the others. I know this is a sensitive topic for hardcore Taylor stans like yourself, but it’s the truth 

[Tprez]

Red is getting the Grammy it deserved 😀😀

[MyAccountGotBanned]

She won’t submit them to the Grammys 

[Iconic 4 U]

Don't let Beyonce hear about this 

[TSmidnighTS]

10 minutes ago, CrazyButItFeelsAllright said:

Her old albums she recorded under her old label should absolutely still be able to chart. Her re-recordings should NOT. At the end of the day, she’s still getting the chart positions of her old albums whether or not she owns the masters. Why should she get two #1s for what is essentially the same album minus a few tweaks? 

I didn't think about this. Do deluxe albums count as the same unit or do both chart separately? If deluxe albums chart separately, then Taylor's version should be able to chart. If not, then it should.

 

7 minutes ago, CrazyButItFeelsAllright said:

You’re talking about releasing the same song. This is re-recording the same songs. It’s not fair. Her old songs should still be allowed to chart, but not these. I don’t get why y’all are pressed. Isn’t the gist of it to give her the profits? She’s still getting the money from these sales. She shouldn’t get more chart records just because there is an entire gimmick campaign around her not owning her masters. This is about her wanting to chart and not because she truly cares she doesn’t own her work. If Billboard came out and said sorry you’re not charting I bet you anything we won’t see Speak Now or any of the others. I know this is a sensitive topic for hardcore Taylor stans like yourself, but it’s the truth 

I know how you feel about her re-releases and I also know that you do have some of her songs that you like. So I know this isn't said with any sort of hate. I want to make sure no one reads your comment and thinks you're just out here trying to hate on an artist for no reason. However, I don't think that we can genuinely say this is all about just a gimmick. I think she has shown time and again that likes to make things special for her fans. She invites them into her own home to listen to albums before they even hit shelves. She really does care about owning her work. She has stood up against MAJOR streaming services like Apple Music and Spotify to change the game for everyone. (It could be argued that she did it for herself, but I think she has been consistent in her message for years on end about wanting to stand up for new artists.) She is releasing Fearless with brand new tracks, new artwork, who knows what else she has planned. I don't think it's fair to say this is all a gimmick.

[Look But Don't Touch]

13 minutes ago, IForgotYouExisted said:

why?

because.

13 minutes ago, IForgotYouExisted said:

Your comment is the same as what happened to Britney in 2007. Yet, here we are, all fighting and tweeting "we are sorry Britney" but at the same time you're like "I hate Taylor".  We are literally dragging people for saying they hate Britney back then, what makes it justified for you to say the same thing but about Taylor. 

Lmao so I cant say I hate someone? There's HUGE difference between Britney in 2007 than Taylor now so honestly stfu, you are disrespectful to Brit rn. Deal with the fact that not everyone like your idol Taylor. And it's honestly gross how you want to take advantage of Britney's breakdown to drag me and say that I should like Taylor wtfff????