Grammy Awards

el-guapo

Following Kanye's pretty disgusting efforts the other night I got to thinking about the Grammy Awards and what a strange event it is. Then I started looking at some of the figures and realised what a joke the Grammys are.

I know, I know, it's a subjective popularity contest, why bother to rationalise it, etc, but seriously??

But even without getting into the "how the hell can [insert supposedly talentless singer] have 800 Grammys and [super popular and talented singer] have none?" it seems ridiculous.

Some of the most important artists of the past several decades have few or no Grammys to show for their efforts. Others with sterling careers have been snubbed for their best work and awarded for their worst. Obviously they might have been up against ludicrously strong opposition in particular years, or the album is only appreciated later, but...

Queen has never won a Grammy, and has only a handful of nominations (although a few of their songs have been included in the Grammy Hall of Fame, which I assume is some sort of "oops, we stuffed up the first time around but I promise we know what we're talking about" opportunity.

Pink Floyd finally won one in 1995 for Best Instrumental (Marooned). Now I like Division Bell, but other than that the closest they ever got was a few nominations for The Wall. Nothing for Wish You Were Here or Dark Side.

The Stones won a Lifetime Achievement Grammy in 1987, having only cracked 2 prior nominations, both in the early 80s. They finally won a couple in 1995, including Best Album for Voodoo Lounge, which most Stones fans consider one of their bottom-5 albums. Beggars Banquet, Let it Bleed, Exile, Sticky bloody Fingers (serious contender for greatest rock album ever IMHO) never got a sniff.

U2 haven't ever been snubbed exactly (22 in all), and the important ones got some recognition: Joshua Tree won/was nominated for a few, as did Achtung Baby. But they got 7 for All That You Can't Leave Behind, which seems to rate as a middling-to-bad album for most U2 fans, and a whopping 9 (joint record holder with Santana's Supernatural) for How To Dismantle an Atomic Bomb, which is routinely rated as their worst album or very close.

Marley - nothing during his lifetime, a Lifetime Achievement and a few nominations in 2001/2

Zeppelin - Best New Artist nomination, then nothing until the gratuitous tippexing of the Grammy Hall of Fame.

I know it's weird that I'm getting this worked up about something I haven't watched since I was about 12, but still.

GuitarDoge

I have long since ignored the Grammys. It's a popularity contest as you stated rather than being based on the actual quality of music. Sam Smith's winning song is far from original, and in my opinion, very boring.

Also, like the equivalent TV and movie award shows its main purpose is not to recognize talent but to drive more sales in the industry.

As for Kanye, Obama called him a jackass.

studmissile

and the biggest of them all!

=

el-guapo

But that's exactly the thing I find the weirdest: they can't even get the popularity contest bit right.

beardedmoose

At the end of the day (for me atleast) the grammys is a marketing tool.

V8

Doomsower

I found a nice explanation: http://www.metalsucks.net/2015/02/10/analysis-tenacious-ds-grammy-win-makes-perfect-sense/

chris77

Must be tough to be a pro muso. Too niche and your music is not popular enough. Too popular and it's not cool enough. Too cool and it becomes lame. Glad I only make music to enjoy myself and don't have to care about what anybody else thinks.

Personally award shows lost all credibility to me the day Russel Crowe won an Oscar for Gladiator. :-[

studmissile

chris77 wrote: Personally award shows lost all credibility to me the day Russel Crowe won an Oscar for Gladiator. :-[

How can you say that? ?

=

chris77

studmissile wrote:
chris77 wrote: Personally award shows lost all credibility to me the day Russel Crowe won an Oscar for Gladiator. :-[
How can you say that? ?

Because he has like only two facial expressions in this movie. The following year I could have understood if he got one for A Beautiful Mind, but for Gladiator? And that's not even taking into consideration that he won it ahead of Tom Hanks for Castaway, who actually convinced me he lost his best friend when a volley ball drifted away on the waves.

Charlie4

chris77 wrote:
studmissile wrote:
chris77 wrote: Personally award shows lost all credibility to me the day Russel Crowe won an Oscar for Gladiator. :-[
How can you say that? ?

Because he has like only two facial expressions in this movie. The following year I could have understood if he got one for A Beautiful Mind, but for Gladiator? And that's not even taking into consideration that he won it ahead of Tom Hanks for Castaway, who actually convinced me he lost his best friend when a volley ball drifted away on the waves.

Tom Hanks got beaten for Castaway? ???
I see your point. He's just way too gifted. ?

studmissile

meh! ?

babbalute

Grammy's ? You think John Lennon (just to name one of them)worries about them ? Of course he would say he'd like one(don't know if he's got one of more) but that he would do just to please the committee members, gentlemen he is.
The figure in his bank account would be a better reflection of popularity and achievement rather than some statue that gathers dust and would most likely get stolen soon.

Impala

Real musicians are artists but the music industry is an 'industry'. The industry pushes what sells and most of the time these days what sells does so for reasons that do have much to do with music.