Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Best New Artist????

1 view
Skip to first unread message

Keith

unread,
Feb 8, 2004, 10:00:37 PM2/8/04
to
I remember a Fountains of Wayne song on a local alternative radio station
circa late '96/early '97. The other artists were shit too.

Keith


Jason Fitch

unread,
Feb 8, 2004, 10:02:28 PM2/8/04
to
"Keith" <kdes...@postoffice.uri.edu> wrote in message
news:FfSdnRySu-V...@adelphia.com...

> I remember a Fountains of Wayne song on a local alternative radio station
> circa late '96/early '97. The other artists were shit too.
>
Yeah, their current album is their third album, I don't get it either.

--
"Please don't dominate the rap, jack, if you've got nothing new to say."


bug

unread,
Feb 8, 2004, 11:33:45 PM2/8/04
to
>Fountains of Wayne

they were the original wallflowers before they sold they're name
steve(vote for me2020!)
http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/whyweigh/myhomepage/index.html?mtbrand=AOL_US
"music is like this porthole into another world... the world of truth."- trey
Write your own name on the fucking ballot you party tools

Ice Cream Man

unread,
Feb 8, 2004, 11:38:24 PM2/8/04
to
best new artist means best artist that recently came to the attention of the
grammy people without being shoved down their throats by the major labels,
after having been passed over by the major labels.

--
John
______________________________
"Is there gas in the car?"
"Yes, there's gas in the caaaaar..."


BOTRnewmusic

unread,
Feb 9, 2004, 9:16:50 AM2/9/04
to
>best new artist means best artist that recently came to the attention of the
>grammy people without being shoved down their throats by the major labels,
>after having been passed over by the major labels.
>

not true

(For a new artist who releases, during the Eligibility Year, the first
recording which establishes the public identity of that artist.)

every artist, if you saw them at the grammys, especially nominated for an
award, had "a" record label pay millions throughout the year on promotion for
that artist. there is no such thing as an artist that does it on his/her own.
phish was probably one of the only bands ever that made a "career" w/out the
help of a label.
the cost to even try an artist out on the radio these days costs roughly 1
million dollars per song. which does not include music video or live
performance

Ice Cream Man

unread,
Feb 9, 2004, 11:33:40 AM2/9/04
to
> recording which establishes the public identity of that artist.)<<

exactly. "new" has nothing to do with it.

>>every artist, if you saw them at the grammys, especially nominated for an
award, had "a" record label pay millions throughout the year on promotion
for that artist.<<

well, since my post was made in regard to fountains of wayne, i'll use them
as an example. they are by no means on a major label now, and were dumped by
their previous label, ATLANTIC, a major.

i just think it's funny that hyped up flashes in the pan compete against
artitsts that have been at it for years in this category. that is all.

BOTRnewmusic

unread,
Feb 9, 2004, 11:37:16 AM2/9/04
to
i agree w u and how they shouldnt be nominated

i saw them open for the pumpkins in about 95

best new artist my ass
but its not their fault the grammys are fucked up


Ice Cream Man

unread,
Feb 9, 2004, 11:55:42 AM2/9/04
to
word. it's just a huge joke. i'm a sucka for awards shows but i can't bring
myself to watch the grammys
0 new messages