smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | rob@splitsville.com |
| Subject | =?US-ASCII?B?UkU6IFJlOiBBbXkgV2hpbmVob3VzZSB3aW5zIEJFU1QgTkVXIEFSVElTVA==?= |
| Date | Mon, 11 Feb 2008 07:25:03 -0500 |
[Part 1 text/plain US-ASCII (1.3 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
And if I remember correctly, FOW got a nomination after Stacey's Mom became popular, several years after the release of their first album
>----- ------- Original Message ------- -----
>From: :audities@smoe.org
>To: audities@smoe.org
>Sent: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 -0800 (PST) 00:56:33
>
>On Mon, 11 Feb 2008, Mike Curry wrote:
>
>> It's all well and good, but she's not even a new
>artist. "Frank" came
>> out in 2003, so she should have actually won the
>award "Best old artist
>> who appears to be a new artist as the record
>company have finally put
>> enough money behind her for most of the music
>buying public to finally
>> sit up and take notice". This is why award
>ceremonies are a load of old
>> tosh.
>
>On the one hand, yes. On the other hand, this isn't
>new..
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammy_Award_for_Best_
>New_Artist
>Maroon 5 in 2005 (they'd been together under that
>name for 4 years
>previously and under another name since the
>mid-90s)....Imogen Heap was
>nominated for the 2007 awards even though her first
>album came out in
>1998...Shelby Lynne won in 2001 and she'd been
>around since the 80s!
>Basically the "new" tag has always been BS. Oh, and
>they gave it to the
>Starland Vocal Band in 1977 over Boston.
>
>At least they gave it to the Beatles in '65..
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.