TCATS didn't deserve a grammy....Who did win in those categories anyway? The
real injustice was two years ago when they were denied Best Alternative Album
award (no offense to nirvana, but ff's debut is alot stronger as a whole than
unplugged)
>and to top it off jamiriqui (i can't spell it) beats Fleetwood Mac
Jamiroqui.....sounds like Egyptian for one-hit wonder
>and the
>Rolling Stones IN THE POP CATEGORY
Rolling Stones' last album was not a rock album, nor was it deserving of a
grammy nomination
,tym
"All the thing I said I wanted turned out to be heaven haunted" -Dave Grohl
Visit the Sea Whores Web Site @ http://members.aol.com/abortme
--
Mike Cunningham
Image Business
Durham, Ontario
Mike Cunningham wrote:
> The fact of the matter is that the grammies have nothing to do with
> critical value or quality and everything to do with major label
> manufactured music and commercial success. If you don't expect anything
> of the grammies, they will not disappoint you...
Damn straight. 90% of the time, the Grammies nominates the crap that I don't
listen to. Hanson nominated? Come on! What bugs me even more is the
classfications. Prodigy and Chemical Brothers as "Alternative" or "Rock"? As much
as I like those guys, I don't see them in those categories.
Peace,
Vince Yim
--
+-------------------------------------------------------+
| E-mail address altered to avoid unsolicited junkmail. |
| Remove asterix marks (*) to reply by e-mail |
+-------------------------------------------------------+