Grammy Nominations

[Mattceinicram]

http://www.grammy.com/nominees

Once again many of the choices are unbelievably bad, and I can't take this event serious anymore. Though I realize the Grammys are mainly entertainment and not a great source for musical opinion.

[JimmyJazz]

Lol! "Roar" in Best Song? Red in Best Album? What a JOKE. I have to mention, it looks like they are actually cheating with some of the noms. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do believe that the Kendrick Lamarr album is from LAST year? Furthermore, him being nominated for Best New Artist is disengenious, considering that I think he's been in the business for a couple of years already... Of course, you're only "new" when the academy decides to recognize you

[Mattceinicram]

Surprisingly, the Alternative Album category is pretty forgivable.

[Jackson]

Lol! "Roar" in Best Song? Red in Best Album? What a JOKE. I have to mention, it looks like they are actually cheating with some of the noms. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do believe that the Kendrick Lamarr album is from LAST year? Furthermore, him being nominated for Best New Artist is disengenious, considering that I think he's been in the business for a couple of years already... Of course, you're only "new" when the academy decides to recognize you

Lamar and Red are 2012 albums but after the cutoff period. The new artist award often honors people who have been performing for a while (recall Bon Iver in 2011).

These Grammy noms are par for the course. Nothing really surprised me positively or negatively.

[PlasticRam]

A Farce.

[Mattceinicram]

Macklemore won best rap album...over Kendrick Lamar.

[PlasticRam]

RAM is a worthy Album of the Year -winner though.

[Mattceinicram]

RAM is a worthy Album of the Year -winner though.

Yes, a much better choice than Babel was last year.

[Honorio]

I'm glad to know that Daft Punk won the Grammy Award. This fact made me go to Wikipedia to know who were the previous winners (for the first time, I admit I didn't care at all about the Grammys before). No surprise to see the big differences between the Grammy winners and the Acclaimed Music winners. Only three coincidences out of 56 (5,35%). More exactly we can divide the Gramnmy winners in three different thirds according to their positions on AM lists:
- 18 Grammy winners ended at the Top 10 of every year on AM lists (32,14%).
- 20 ended at AM Top 3000 but outside the Top 10 of every year (35,71%).
- 18 ended outside the AM Top 3000 (32,14%), 13 of them not even bubbling under.
The 90s and the 00s were the decades with less coincidences (10 of the 20 albums ended outside the AM 3000).
The "albums of the agreement" were:
#1 in AM year list: "Thriller" (winner of Grammy 1984), "The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill" (1999) and "The Suburbs" (2011).
#2 in AM: "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band" (1968), "Innervisions" (1974), "Songs in the Key of Life" (1977), "Graceland" (1987), "The Joshua Tree" (1988), "Time Out of Mind" (1998) and "Speakerboxxx/The Love Below" (2004)
#3: "Getz/Gilberto" (1965)
#4: "Rumours" (1978) and "Random Access Memories" (2014)
#7: "Bridge Over Troubled Waters" (1971)
#8: "Tapestry" (1972), "Saturday Night Fever" (1979) and "Jagged Little Pill" (1996).
#10: "Judy at Carnegie Hall" (1962)

[Harold]

First year I can think of where all 3 of the top award winners - Album, Record ("Get Lucky"), and Song ("Royals") - are worthy, or at least non-cringe-worthy.

[Listyguy]

I really don't understand why they are two separate awards for Record and Song of the year. What I don't get even more is how the same song doesn't win both.

Also, Imagine Dragons are not rock. No way, no how.

[Kingoftonga]

I really don't understand why they are two separate awards for Record and Song of the year. What I don't get even more is how the same song doesn't win both.

One is for the songwriter, and one is for the performer, but I can never remember which is which.

[Listyguy]

I really don't understand why they are two separate awards for Record and Song of the year. What I don't get even more is how the same song doesn't win both.

One is for the songwriter, and one is for the performer, but I can never remember which is which.

I don't get why the songwriter and performer (who, on occasion, are actually the same person) can't both get one award.

[Harold]

I really don't understand why they are two separate awards for Record and Song of the year. What I don't get even more is how the same song doesn't win both.

One is for the songwriter, and one is for the performer, but I can never remember which is which.

I don't get why the songwriter and performer (who, on occasion, are actually the same person) can't both get one award.

Song of the Year goes to the songwriter(s) alone, and is meant to recognize the quality of the song itself over and above any recorded version of said song. Record of the Year goes to the artist and the producer, and is meant to recognize that specific recording. Often, the same recording does win both awards, but I think they made the right call this year - I don't think too many people would argue that "Get Lucky" is necessarily a better piece of songwriting than "Royals" (not saying such an argument couldn't be made).

[Harold]

Also, not saying that an argument couldn't also be made that "Royals" is a better recording than "Get Lucky." Maximalism vs. minimalism, and all that.

[Jirin]

Ugh, I can't believe that Bruno Mars song gets so much accolades.

WHOOP WHOOP WHOOOOOP WHOOP WHOOP WHOOP WHOOOOOP WHOOP OOMPH!

Every ten seconds. The entire song. It's the sort of parasitic song that burrows into your brain and destroys the host from within. It's even worse if you are watching a live performance because there's a line of guys doing the cheesiest dance moves ever.