• 02-05-2009, 04:07 PM
    Sugar Beats
    Looks like the "Brits" have taken over the grammys this Sunday...
    Coldplay, Adele, Duffy, Leona Lewis, and Led Zep's Robert Plant along w/ Radiohead seems to have dominated much of the categories.

    Funny, the only artist w/ the most noms is Lil Wayne.
    Go figure. :crazy:
  • 02-05-2009, 04:27 PM
    ForeverAutumn
    The Grammy's suck. So do the Juno's. So does the Rock and Roll HOF.

    Can't remember the last time I watched a music awards show. :nonod:
  • 02-05-2009, 04:50 PM
    bobsticks
    With the exception of recent additions Adele and Duffy couldn't this thread have been written in 2003? Oh wait...no Metallica...

    The Grammys are, indeed, lame.

    As an aside, the use of the word "only" in conjunction with the word "most" is redundant. Howya like me now? Not bad for a word whore...hehehe
  • 02-05-2009, 06:21 PM
    Sugar Beats
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bobsticks
    As an aside, the use of the word "only" in conjunction with the word "most" is redundant. Howya like me now? Not bad for a word whore...hehehe

    Gee Thanks for correcting me kind sir!
  • 02-05-2009, 07:45 PM
    Rich-n-Texas
    GOD that avatar!

    :mad2: :mad2: :mad2:
  • 02-05-2009, 07:54 PM
    Somebody still watches the Grammys?
  • 02-05-2009, 10:13 PM
    Sugar Beats
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nightflier
    Somebody still watches the Grammys?
    I don't really "watch" them. I saw the Katie Couric interview the other day w/ some of the nom's.
  • 02-05-2009, 10:14 PM
    Sugar Beats
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Rich-n-Texas
    GOD that avatar!

    :mad2: :mad2: :mad2:

    Gee Richie, I woulda switched it awhile back, had I known what a strong reaction I would get outta you!
  • 02-06-2009, 07:38 AM
    Auricauricle
    Hit the shower, Richie!
  • 02-07-2009, 05:53 AM
    Swish
    I wish the Brits would take it over....
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Sugar Beats
    Coldplay, Adele, Duffy, Leona Lewis, and Led Zep's Robert Plant along w/ Radiohead seems to have dominated much of the categories.

    Funny, the only artist w/ the most noms is Lil Wayne.
    Go figure. :crazy:
    ...overseas that is. Then don't broadcast it either so we don't accidentally see any of this overblown piece 'o ****e.
  • 02-07-2009, 07:28 AM
    ForeverAutumn
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nightflier
    Somebody still watches the Grammys?
    I suppose a lot of people still watch them or they wouldn't get so much media attention. It just irks me that there is so much incredible music out there that gets no attention.

    The Juno's (the Canadian version of the Grammy's) is just as bad. Nickelback got five nominations this year. :frown2: Nominations for Best NEW Group include The Stills, who have four albums and The Cancer Bats who have three. I'd really like to ask the Juno committee for their definition of "new".

    At least there are no nominations for Billy Talent or Alexisonfire this year. I guess I can be thankful for that. :rolleyes5:
  • 02-07-2009, 10:08 AM
    Swish
    That's really not the point, at least for me.
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ForeverAutumn
    It just irks me that there is so much incredible music out there that gets no attention.
    It's the silliness of it all, being that music, like all art, is totally subjective. If you want to give someone an award for 'Biggest Selling CD of the Year', that would have credibility because you can quantify it. Otherwise, it's no different than any other popularity contest, like Homecoming Queen.

    I do get what you're saying though. How can anyone vote for something as the best when they've heard so little? That being said, it's just a bunch of people who feel they need a pat on the back for recording something. I still love the line from Whitney Houston a few years back after being snubbed for any awards at the Grammys; "I'm tired of people doing work and not getting any credit". Unbelievable.
  • 02-07-2009, 05:32 PM
    Completelt agreed, but...
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ForeverAutumn
    I suppose a lot of people still watch them or they wouldn't get so much media attention. It just irks me that there is so much incredible music out there that gets no attention.

    The Juno's (the Canadian version of the Grammy's) is just as bad. Nickelback got five nominations this year. :frown2: Nominations for Best NEW Group include The Stills, who have four albums and The Cancer Bats who have three. I'd really like to ask the Juno committee for their definition of "new".

    At least there are no nominations for Billy Talent or Alexisonfire this year. I guess I can be thankful for that. :rolleyes5:
    Aren't the awards also based on sales volume?
  • 02-07-2009, 07:02 PM
    Rich-n-Texas
    The Grammys are based on which act gets the most bleeps in their songs. It's a gangsta thang, see what I sayin'?
  • 02-07-2009, 08:12 PM
    02audionoob
    The Grammy award do suck. Heavy Metal award to Jethro Tull? Ignore Shelby Lynne for 10 years and then give her Best New Artist? Ignore Bonnie Raitt for 15 years and then give her an armload when she finally gets on the pop charts?