|  | 
01-09-2007, 07:42 PM
| | Banned | | Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Montreal,Canada | | | 1982 grammy awards
Sign in to disble this ad
I read something about YYZ and how it got beaten by "Behind my Camel" by the police. I just listened to the song and it's so freakin repetitive, usually rock instrumentals have a lot more than the same riffs going over and over again. I really don't get how it beat YYZ with it's fast riffs and energetic solo's. The guy's who voted must of had no sense. Now there are a lot of police fans out there but i see this as not one of their best performances. The song sounds like it could be pulled of by any band. Rush fans must of been really dissapointed. |
01-09-2007, 07:59 PM
| | | | I think a lot of people dismissed progressive rock as pretentious, unfortunately. I also think YYZ deserved to win.
Graeme |
01-09-2007, 08:11 PM
| | | Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua  Pitting art against other art for an award is a pretty silly concept to begin with imo... | Wise words here.
Graeme |
01-09-2007, 08:23 PM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Kansas City, MO | | | It's because the Grammys are voted on by a lot of old people who are more likely to listen to the Police than to Rush.
A similar thing happened in the late 1980s when the Grammys finally added a category for "Hard Rock/Heavy Metal". Metallica performed "One" during the telecast, and pretty much everyone expected them to win it. Then the winner was announced.....Jethro Tull???
__________________
Lefty Union Member #11
|
01-09-2007, 08:29 PM
| | Banned | | Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Montreal,Canada | | | That's why they should get both bands to perform their song at the show, or at least show the whole video not some clip. |
01-10-2007, 08:15 AM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Kansas City, MO | | Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua | Interesting, thanks! I had forgotten that Jane's Addiction's "Nothing's Shocking" was one of the other nominees that year. I really like that one. And I suppose I shouldn't criticize Jethro Tull winning without having heard the record. (But it's so much fun to do so anyway). 
The Grammys do have a long history of voting for bland, lightweight stuff. Note that the big winner that year (Record of the Year, Song of the Year) was "Don't Worry, Be Happy"! Yikes! http://www.rockonthenet.com/archive/1989/grammys.htm
__________________
Lefty Union Member #11
Last edited by Vandelay : 01-10-2007 at 08:17 AM.
|
01-10-2007, 10:50 AM
| | Pat's the best! | | Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: Northern Virginia, USA | | I think a memorable melody is what typical grammy voters are looking for. Andy Summers' heavily effected guitar melody on "Behind My Camel" is downright infectious. YYZ is a darn cool song (I haven't heard it in quite some time) but not the most melodic piece. Quote: |
I think a lot of people dismissed progressive rock as pretentious, unfortunately.
| Progressive rock is extremely pretentious, that's part of it's charm. You have to be either pretentious or insane to pull off something like "2112" or "Supper's Ready" or "Operation: Mindcrime" or silly nonsensical Yes lyrics.
Yes progrock is pretentious, but no it shouldn't be dismissed. |
01-10-2007, 03:48 PM
| | Banned | | Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Montreal,Canada | | | ya it might be melodic but they played the same thing over and over. |
01-10-2007, 04:09 PM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Ribwich, ZF | | | Behind My Camel kicks ass.
__________________
Chaos reigns. |
01-10-2007, 04:51 PM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Ankh-Morpork | | | the thing is..... tull was given the award for an album they put out in 1987, and figured they had no chance of winning and thus didn't go to the award ceremony.
Can't bring myself to be annoyed with Tull there.... I always thought the Grammy's were a bit of an incestuous joke to begin with.
__________________
WTB - Ovation Magnum 1
|
01-10-2007, 07:29 PM
| | Banned | | Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Montreal,Canada | | | that is kinda true because most people will just go for the band that is more popular and vote for them even though they haven't heard the other band's song. who's idea was it anyways to make an awards ceremony for music, people like what they like. There should be no competition because bands don't write songs to win grammy's. It's not the same as a football team getting ready to win the superbowl. |
01-10-2007, 09:07 PM
|  | Basement Clef | | Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Below Ground, Detroit area | | | HEAVY flute METAL!
__________________
Only red lights are forever.
Don't act your disease, defy it.
Fender Precision club member #63. LDS Cabinet Owner #17, Hartke Club Member #86
|
01-11-2007, 07:42 AM
| | Pat's the best! | | Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: Northern Virginia, USA | | Quote:
Originally Posted by peaveyuser that is kinda true because most people will just go for the band that is more popular and vote for them even though they haven't heard the other band's song. who's idea was it anyways to make an awards ceremony for music, people like what they like. There should be no competition because bands don't write songs to win grammy's. It's not the same as a football team getting ready to win the superbowl. | True, but people in the industry want a way to recognize great work. It's nice to be recognized by your peers both in a nomination and in a win. |
01-11-2007, 06:24 PM
|  | - that dog won't hunt, Monsignor. Moderator | | | | | I agree with the Simpson's take on the matter.
__________________
aka Blisshead.
| | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | | | | 
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off | | | |
