Grammys

[TAS 2]

I'm pretty B&R have seen their best days. Talk about yer one hit wonders.

I'm not too big on B&R either, but my point is that their reaction, imo, will be pretty consistent with most other country artists/fans.

[wiffleball 4,793]

Thats exactly the problem with the grammys. Politics has NO PLACE in it period.

 

There is no way you can spin the numbers to say the Dixie Chicks were deserving of 5 grammys, sorry. 2 or 3 is a stretch but to give them 5 when there albums and singles were outsold by others? It has become a political statement by people who are voting on this stuff. I really feel bad for the other artists who were as if not more deserving of awards. Its a huge slap in the face for the work they do.

 

Looking through the lists of nominees, winners, album and single sales I am speechless how they are coming to these conclusions.

 

 

I think that's what cracks me up - the one sided thought processes like this.

 

If "politics" doesn't belong in the selection of music awards (agreed), then shouldn't the DC - who managed to win buttloads of 'country' awards before AND after the infamous "comment" NOT be blackballed from winning country music awards too?

 

 

In short, the arguments I've seen today go like this:

 

1) DC Shut out of the CMA's? It's because country people rejected their politics - but politics shouldn't be part of the Grammy's, - just apparently the CMA's and ACM's.

 

2) DC Shut of out of the CMA's? It's because they changed their music away from country. - But the reason they won majoy "non-country" Grammy's is b/c of their politics, not because they changed their music.

 

I'm not too big on B&R either, but my point is that their reaction, imo, will be pretty consistent with most other country artists/fans.

 

 

I think that'll be the public reaction, you're right. But anybody who knows anything about Austin and the Texas music scene knows that they're non-commercial and about as 'left' as yer gonna find in Texas. They don't have much patience or respect for commercial sell-outs waving the flag just to sell Fords and Chevy's.

 

To be honest, I've never gotten the impression that the DC gave too much of a crap about being accepted by Nashville. The Texas scene is unique unto itself. Most of them could give a damn about Clear Channel, Nashville, and endorsement deals. The way country music has gone the past few years, I think they're better off distancing themselves from the "honky tonk badonkadonk" product that Nashville's putting out.

[OakHeadFootball 1]

So, the other 8 grammy's that the DC won before the infamous "comment" were what? Psychic votes by radical left wing liberal Bush haters?

 

Actually it was 9, but you knew that, right?

 

# 2005: Best Country Performance by a Duo or Group with Vocal - "Top Of The World"

 

# 2003: Best Country Album - Home (Note: the album "Home" was being promoted when Natalie spoke out and received 4 grammys 6x Platinum. Although album sales were not nearly as high as "Fly" and "Wide Open Spaces" it received twice as many grammys than there previous better selling works. See a pattern forming?)

 

# 2003: Best Country Performance by a Duo or Group with Vocal - "Long Time Gone"

# 2003: Best Country Instrumental Performance - "Lil' Jack Slade"

# 2003: Best Recording Package - Home

# 2000: Best Country Album - Fly ( NOTE:10xPlantnium received "diamond" status won 2 grammys)

# 2000: Best Country Performance by a Duo or Group with Vocal - "Ready to Run"

# 1999: Best Country Album - Wide Open Spaces (NOTE: 12xPlatnium received "diamond" status and won 2 grammys)

# 1999: Best Country Performance by a Duo or Group with Vocal - "There's Your Trouble"

 

So we have 9 previous grammys spread out over 6 years and 4 albums. Furthermore "Fly" and "Wide Open Spaces" had sold more albums at the time they won grammys than"Take the long road" or "Home" by FAR. Yet they don't walk away with 5 grammy awards for either or the first 2 hit albums. Yet they win 4 with "Home" which was at the heart of the controversy.

 

Then 5 grammys in ONE year for a 9th best selling album?? "In 2006, Taking the Long Way was the ninth best-selling album in the United States. It won the 2007 Grammy Award for Best Album, Best Record & Best Song (for 'Not Ready To Make Nice', and Best Country Album on February 11, 2007"

 

 

Sorry, like I said previously it just does not add up. Has a 9th best selling album won 5 Grammy awards in the past?

 

My personal feelings on the Dixie Chicks are irrelevant. Politics has no place in the grammys It is developing a pattern that I am hard pressed to ignore.

 

Feel free to try and disprove my theory that there are political motivations going on at the Grammy awards.

[wiffleball 4,793]

Actually it was 9, but you knew that, right?

 

# 2005: Best Country Performance by a Duo or Group with Vocal - "Top Of The World"

 

# 2003: Best Country Album - Home (Note: the album "Home" was being promoted when Natalie spoke out and received 4 grammys 6x Platinum. Although album sales were not nearly as high as "Fly" and "Wide Open Spaces" it received twice as many grammys than there previous better selling works. See a pattern forming?)

 

# 2003: Best Country Performance by a Duo or Group with Vocal - "Long Time Gone"

# 2003: Best Country Instrumental Performance - "Lil' Jack Slade"

# 2003: Best Recording Package - Home

# 2000: Best Country Album - Fly ( NOTE:10xPlantnium received "diamond" status won 2 grammys)

# 2000: Best Country Performance by a Duo or Group with Vocal - "Ready to Run"

# 1999: Best Country Album - Wide Open Spaces (NOTE: 12xPlatnium received "diamond" status and won 2 grammys)

# 1999: Best Country Performance by a Duo or Group with Vocal - "There's Your Trouble"

 

So we have 9 previous grammys spread out over 6 years and 4 albums. Furthermore "Fly" and "Wide Open Spaces" had sold more albums at the time they won grammys than"Take the long road" or "Home" by FAR. Yet they don't walk away with 5 grammy awards for either or the first 2 hit albums. Yet they win 4 with "Home" which was at the heart of the controversy.

 

Then 5 grammys in ONE year for a 9th best selling album?? "In 2006, Taking the Long Way was the ninth best-selling album in the United States. It won the 2007 Grammy Award for Best Album, Best Record & Best Song (for 'Not Ready To Make Nice', and Best Country Album on February 11, 2007"

Sorry, like I said previously it just does not add up. Has a 9th best selling album won 5 Grammy awards in the past?

 

My personal feelings on the Dixie Chicks are irrelevant. Politics has no place in the grammys It is developing a pattern that I am hard pressed to ignore.

 

Feel free to try and disprove my theory that there are political motivations going on at the Grammy awards.

 

 

1) It is a tip that number of records sold and Grammy awards does not correlate. I'm pretty sure Tony Bennet didn't hit the top of the charts, but he won a grammy. So, I don't know WTF your point is in trying to connect record sales with Grammy wins. - Stupid premise.

 

 

2) So, they won half their Grammy's before the 'controversy' and half after, what's your focking point? Obivously, the history you list proves that 'controversy' isn't the reason they won Grammy's.

[OakHeadFootball 1]

1) It is a tip that number of records sold and Grammy awards does not correlate. I'm pretty sure Tony Bennet didn't hit the top of the charts, but he won a grammy. So, I don't know WTF your point is in trying to connect record sales with Grammy wins. - Stupid premise.

2) So, they won half their Grammy's before the 'controversy' and half after, what's your focking point? Obivously, the history you list proves that 'controversy' isn't the reason they won Grammy's.

 

 

Its a tip, learn to read, tool.

 

We have 4 grammys before the "incident"(for 2 records that vastly outsold anything they have done since)

 

And 10 grammys after the "incident"

 

Ahh yes don't correlate record sales with grammy awards!! Silly me its all about looks, world peace, and how well they bake cookies.

[wiffleball 4,793]

Its a tip, learn to read, tool.

 

We have 4 grammys before the "incident"(for 2 records that vastly outsold anything they have done since)

 

And 10 grammys after the "incident"

 

Ahh yes don't correlate record sales with grammy awards!! Silly me its all about looks, world peace, and how well they bake cookies.

 

You really need to get your facts straight there, sporto:

 

When did the 2003 Grammy Awards show occur? February 23, 2003 (note: this is the one where they won the FOUR AWARDS you mentioned)

 

When did Maines make her infamous comment? MARCH 10, 2003.

 

So, let's re-do the math to fit the facts, you Half-Wit Marooon

 

EIGHT Grammy's BEFORE "the controversy" and SIX AFTER. At least get your facts straight first you moron. PWNED!!

 

But yeah, I'm sure you're right about those political motivations getting them the Grammys - especially since they earned the majority of their grammys BEFORE Maines ever opened her maw.

 

Man, you just gotta like a complete idiot right about now, dontcha???

________________________________________

 

NEXT axx-kicking:

 

 

So you really think there's a 1:1 relationship between record sales and grammy's? Focking hysterical. you're not even worth discussing this with if you can't even figure that one out. So, by your logic, the other FIFTEEN ALBUMS that sold more than the DC should have MORE Grammy's right? Huh, it's a wonder the Pussycat Dolls didn't kick the crap outta the DC then.

 

Silly me, it's all about what other musicians consider quality musicianship.

 

Dumbass.

 

[Lionsjunkie 1]

Shakira and those hips... MY GOD

 

[wiffleball 4,793]

 

 

Dude, seriously. Those hips are amazing. I can't imagine what it's like to be with her.

 

...but I'm gonna spend a lot of time and man-gravy trying to...

[OakHeadFootball 1]

You really need to get your facts straight there, sporto:

 

When did the 2003 Grammy Awards show occur? February 23, 2003 (note: this is the one where they won the FOUR AWARDS you mentioned)

 

When did Maines make her infamous comment? MARCH 10, 2003.

 

So, let's re-do the math to fit the facts, you Half-Wit Marooon

 

EIGHT Grammy's BEFORE "the controversy" and SIX AFTER. At least get your facts straight first you moron. PWNED!!

 

But yeah, I'm sure you're right about those political motivations getting them the Grammys - especially since they earned the majority of their grammys BEFORE Maines ever opened her maw.

 

Man, you just gotta like a complete idiot right about now, dontcha???

________________________________________

 

NEXT axx-kicking:

So you really think there's a 1:1 relationship between record sales and grammy's? Focking hysterical. you're not even worth discussing this with if you can't even figure that one out. So, by your logic, the other FIFTEEN ALBUMS that sold more than the DC should have MORE Grammy's right? Huh, it's a wonder the Pussycat Dolls didn't kick the crap outta the DC then.

 

Silly me, it's all about what other musicians consider quality musicianship.

 

Dumbass.

 

 

You are right about the time , something I overlooked, But it doesn't invalidate my argument that political bias is present. For a nationally televised spectacle and considered by many to be "THE" award to win in the music industry shouldn't is somewhat reflect album sales? You know the consumer who is actually paying to support the record industry. "Living with War" 3 nominations? Dixie Chicks 5 Grammys?

 

 

Apparently I am not the only one who feels that way.

 

The singer of progressive metal band Tool did not attend the Grammy ceremony to receive their award. Lead singer Maynard James Keenan explained his thoughts of the Grammys:

 

I think the Grammys are nothing more than some gigantic promotional machine for the music industry. They cater to a low intellect and they feed the masses. They don't honor the arts or the artist for what he created. It's the music business celebrating itself. That's basically what it's all about.

 

—Maynard James Keenan, Gabriella (July 2002). Interview with Maynard James Keenan of Tool. NY Rock.

 

As with all media awards, the Grammy Awards are often criticized for failing to adequately represent the popular sentiment of the public. The Recording Academy and record companies are responsible for entering the works that they deem most deserving. Once a work is entered, reviewing sessions are held by over 150 experts from the recording industry. This is done only to determine whether or not a work is eligible or entered into the proper category. The nominating process requires that members vote only in their fields of expertise. They may nominate in the four general categories (Record Of The Year, Album Of The Year, Song Of The Year and Best New Artist) and in no more than nine out of 31 fields on their ballots. Once the nominations are secured, Recording Academy members may then vote in the four general categories and in no more than eight of the 31 fields. Ballots again are tabulated in secrecy by the major independent accounting firm, Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu.[1] However, the nature of both the nominating and voting processes are becoming increasingly questioned by industry critics.

 

There is much debate about whether or not this sort of nominating process is the result of commercial, political or industry bias. Some conservative critics have argued that major award shows like the Grammy Awards are merely the recording industry's attempt to congratulate their own while advertising their products and ideas through the use of selection bias in the nominating process. The winners, critics argue, would naturally reflect "the social, political and artistic preferences of the nominating and voting members." Other critics, including those within the industry, openly question whether the Grammy Awards are even relevant in today's digital society.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammy#Criticism