[Album] Grammy Awards 2007

The show was last night and the winners are... poorly picked.

Check them out here.

Some of the awards disgust me actually. Beyonce winning contemporary R&B album of the year? That should have gone to Ne-Yo. Luda didn't deserve his rap album of the year; that should have gone to Lupe Fiasco (or TI, but I don't like Southern Rap). The Dixie Chicks swept the major awards, which I don't really have a problem with. Carrie Underwood winning best new artist is BS though - Corinne Bailey Rae deserved that. Also, I don't understand how Imogen Heap got nominated for that category since she's been around for years...

What do you think about the selections?

Jam it back in, in the dark.

I think John Mayer deserved album of the year by a long shot. Funnily enough he actually worked on two of the songs on that Dixie Chicks album that won it.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Corinne Bailey Rae is good, but didn't take off like Carrie Underwood did. I had only heard her name before the Grammys; after hearing her perform, I will be hunting down her album. Same with that guy who sang with her (the one that wasn't John Mayer ). I thought it very amusing that the Dixie Chicks won so many awards. I think they deserved it, though; that cd was a good one. Same with Mary J. Blige's wins - she's an amazing artist, and her performances were some of the best of the night. I thought her performance of "Be Without You" was the best Grammy performance in a long time.

I was also very impressed by Justin Timberlake's performances, despite the fact that I don't care for him as an artist. He has a fantastic voice, and I wasn't aware that he did any piano or guitar playing. The duet with the contest winner was also surprisingly good.

All in all, I was impressed by the awards show itself, despite some disagreements on who won what.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Awards are worthless, and Natalie Maines needs to be shot in the kneecap (I hate George Bush, too, but what an obnoxious little bitch she is). First hour was worth watching, though; both the Police (though the pre-recorded backing vocals were cheesy) and Rae/Legend/Mayer were great.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

I missed the first hour but caught the last half hour with JT and RHCP. I felt like the best rock album of the year was utter bull, giving it to such a lackluster attempt of an album like Stadium Arcadium. Definitely not RHCP best, and definitely not worthy of any award. I wish I caught the Police reunion. JT's performance was pretty neat, and the other girl wasn't toooo bad. I thought his album was overall a good album as well.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Originally Posted by Drex

Corinne Bailey Rae is good, but didn't take off like Carrie Underwood did. I had only heard her name before the Grammys; after hearing her perform, I will be hunting down her album.

That's because
1) She's from the UK.
2) She didn't win American idol.
3) She doesn't sing "club music" - her style of R&B is more like soul music.

Originally Posted by Grubdog

I think John Mayer deserved album of the year by a long shot. Funnily enough he actually worked on two of the songs on that Dixie Chicks album that won it.

Really? His album sounds way too similar to his earlier works for me.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Originally Posted by Mucknuggle

Really? His album sounds way too similar to his earlier works for me.

Amen to that.

It seems like the Grammys factor in both quality of the music and how well they sold. Carrie Underwood's CD was really good, and I think it deserved to at least do well. Now that I'm going to listen to Corrine Bailey Rae my opinion might change on who I thought should win, but that's how things go sometimes. At least now she's hopefully gaining a bit more notoriety. With her voice, she'll win a Grammy soon enough anyway.

FELIPE NO

I dunno, despite the fact that it 'should be' honoring the best music, factoring in sales is pretty important, in my opinion. You just can't be everywhere and listen to everything, and what everyone is listening to is hopefully an okay indication of what's good.

I don't think James Blunt should have been nominated for anything more than best song or whatever. His cd was lame, and that song was good and catchy, but not among the best of the year. And his live performance left much to be desired.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

I'll definitely give you the "look" bias. I think a lot of your gripe is coming more from Grammys overlooking entire genres of music rather than artists and albums. Because a lot of the 'unknown' good music isn't on the charts because it doesn't fit the charts. Grammys has always been geared towards the 'major' genres that the charts keep track of.

I didn't know that, but that was a different era, as well. With some fantastic competition going on. Back in the day of good music. :P It is a travesty, though. Won't disagree. Queen? Man.

How ya doing, buddy?

Originally Posted by Mucknuggle

That's because
1) She's from the UK.
2) She didn't win American idol.
3) She doesn't sing "club music" - her style of R&B is more like soul music.

What clubs do you go into that they're playing country music?

There's nowhere I can't reach.

I guess congrats to Slayer for winning the best Metal performance. Though the Grammy's are a farce and really doesn't matter at all.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by Acro-nym

What clubs do you go into that they're playing country music?

The club comment was meant to point out that she doesn't do the kind of R&B that tends to sell well to the teen and early twenties markets. She has a much more "adult friendly" style of R&B.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Originally Posted by Mucknuggle

Really? His album sounds way too similar to his earlier works for me.

His new album is what made me notice him, his previous two were more pop records (not that there's anything wrong with that) and Continuum really highlights his blues roots and songwriting talents. He's becoming the Hendrix of our generation. His performance with John Legend and Rae summed it up. Both of those artists were great too.

I don't get all this negativity, if nobody has heard of a band their songs haven't had much impact and don't really matter. If they are too lazy / uninspired to climb the musical ranks then that's their problem.

Most amazing jew boots

Quote:

Continuum really highlights his blues roots and songwriting talents.

Quote:

He's becoming the Hendrix of our generation.

Quote:

if nobody has heard of a band their songs haven't had much impact and don't really matter.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Originally Posted by Grubdog

I don't get all this negativity, if nobody has heard of a band their songs haven't had much impact and don't really matter. If they are too lazy / uninspired to climb the musical ranks then that's their problem.

Because we know commercial viability and talent go hand in hand.

right?
RIGHT?
RIGHT?

Get out from under that boulder you like to hide behind, you'll see that fame and talent are not correlated. You'd be surprised how many crappy musicians are fixed in protools.

FELIPE NO

Nope. Yes, there are a lot of crappy mainstream musicians, there always was and always will be. Don't throw your bitterness at me.

Kuttlas: Talk. The man has jammed with and is GREATLY respected by Eric Clapton, Buddy Guy, BB King, Stevie Wonder and most of the greats who are still around today. He has SRV (Stevie Ray Vaughan) tattoed on his arm. "Slow Dancing" is one of the most refreshing blues tunes in ages. Or was it the songwriting part you disagree with? Listen to "The Heart Of Life", even if that isn't released as a single it'll be remembered in 20 years.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Originally Posted by Grubdog

Or was it the songwriting part you disagree with? Listen to "The Heart Of Life", even if that isn't released as a single it'll be remembered in 20 years.

I haven't even heard of that song. It's not even important.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Drex

Because a lot of the 'unknown' good music isn't on the charts because it doesn't fit the charts. Grammys has always been geared towards the 'major' genres that the charts keep track of.

Oh come on, there is no way Dance or Metal is as popular as Punk. Christ there is an awad for POLKA! No one listens to Polka.

The grammys are bullshit because they are determined soley by the record companies that are part of the RIAA. Doesn't matter how good a record Youth Group, a now mainstream band, put out this year, because Epitaph arn't part of the RIAA it's never going to be associated with the Grammys.

You can win an MTV award for single of the year but since your record company is named Fuelled by Ramen you are not going to be apart of the Grammys.

Originally Posted by Traumatized Rat

Because we know commercial viability and talent go hand in hand.

right?
RIGHT?
RIGHT?

Are you even reading what Grubdog wrote? What part of it did he suggest that?

Let's take Snow Patrol for example.
Their new stuff isn't much better or worse than their old stuffer stuff. I mean these guys ahve been kicking around for like 9 years now. But what album matter's more, which one is more important/memorable and popular? Eyes Open or whatever their debut was?

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Gnarls Barkley (or Cee Lo whatever you want to call him) has the absolute biggest teeth I have ever seen. I thought he was wearing dentures when I first saw him.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Why is Oakenfold still getting nominated for Grammy's? They should nominate Tie$to for one while they're at it :angry:

At least Stuart Price/Madonna won the Best Dance Album award. Every track on "Confessions..." was done very well. The whole album is accessible to the mainstream, but the singles can still fill dance floors all over the place.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?