Author Topic: The Grammy's these days  (Read 2769 times)

Joe Rogaine

  • Space Champion!
  • Posts: 1526
The Grammy's these days
« on: October 28, 2009, 10:25:11 PM »
It probably doesnt mean what it use to, to win a  grammy today. Have you heard the people that they give those things to these days.

KickTheBobo

  • Guest
Re: The Grammy's these days
« Reply #1 on: November 08, 2009, 10:00:21 AM »
it never meant anything. Assigning a rating to something subjective like art or music is just stupid.

That's not to say that it wasn't kind of weird/ funny when Jethro Tull won over Metallica in '89.

dave from knoxville

  • Space Champion!
  • Posts: 5108
Re: The Grammy's these days
« Reply #2 on: November 08, 2009, 10:25:45 AM »
it never meant anything. Assigning a rating to something subjective like art or music is just stupid.

That's not to say that it wasn't kind of weird/ funny when Jethro Tull won over Metallica in '89.

You've just trashed the basis of 100% of my leisure time. Where's the nearest bridge?

KickTheBobo

  • Guest
Re: The Grammy's these days
« Reply #3 on: November 08, 2009, 10:54:37 AM »
it never meant anything. Assigning a rating to something subjective like art or music is just stupid.

That's not to say that it wasn't kind of weird/ funny when Jethro Tull won over Metallica in '89.

You've just trashed the basis of 100% of my leisure time. Where's the nearest bridge?

I really hope that you would not let the half-assed opinion of some internet weenie ever affect how you spend your leisure time.

I'm curious though, do you think you enjoy the math/ statistics part of making top-whatever lists more than the actual music itself? I say this as a person who has spent countless hours driving around to junk shops/ thrift store looking for vinyl, and now that I have moved beyond that I can see that it was always about the HUNT, and the music was secondary. Shit, I bought albums that I never even listened to.

daveB from Oakland

  • Space Champion!
  • Posts: 1409
Re: The Grammy's these days
« Reply #4 on: November 08, 2009, 12:05:13 PM »
I think "The Grammies" should be an award given to the best drug dealers.






Or the cutest, most delightful grandmothers.



Or if there was an old lady who was both of those things, she would obviously be a shoo-in.
"He didn't sound like a human when I was talking to him ... he sounded like a shape ... what's that shape of that building ... you know, where the Army lives?" -- Bryce, 11/24/2009

dave from knoxville

  • Space Champion!
  • Posts: 5108
Re: The Grammy's these days
« Reply #5 on: November 08, 2009, 02:24:10 PM »
it never meant anything. Assigning a rating to something subjective like art or music is just stupid.

That's not to say that it wasn't kind of weird/ funny when Jethro Tull won over Metallica in '89.

You've just trashed the basis of 100% of my leisure time. Where's the nearest bridge?

I really hope that you would not let the half-assed opinion of some internet weenie ever affect how you spend your leisure time.

I'm curious though, do you think you enjoy the math/ statistics part of making top-whatever lists more than the actual music itself? I say this as a person who has spent countless hours driving around to junk shops/ thrift store looking for vinyl, and now that I have moved beyond that I can see that it was always about the HUNT, and the music was secondary. Shit, I bought albums that I never even listened to.

Depends on the music. And I AM one of those internet weenies.

Stupornaut

  • Achilles Tendon Bursitis
  • Posts: 796
Re: The Grammy's these days
« Reply #6 on: November 08, 2009, 07:01:16 PM »
Assigning a rating to something subjective like art or music is just stupid.

3.2
twitter.com/natepatrin //\\ natepatrin.tumblr.com

nec13

  • Space Champion!
  • Posts: 2397
Re: The Grammy's these days
« Reply #7 on: November 11, 2009, 10:51:32 PM »
I give this thread a solid 7.7.
Nobody ever lends money to a man with a sense of humor.