Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
but for the majority of the users of this site, I can't see the Mercurys being too big a deal beyond maybe getting them to investigate the nominee's album's they hadn't previously heard. The Mercury sees more geared for those who don't such an active interest / following and winning / getting nominated acts as a mark of validation to get those people's attention.
like Wild Beasts next year
Thanks for asking though. I'll refrain from banging on about it, because that would suggest that i do care.
and it gets people talking. and gets relatively obscure artists into the charts
It's nice to see a few people being nominated who wouldn't normally have a whole lot of exposure (Polar Bear, Portico Quartet, Rachel Unthank... Led Bib this year) but it is a bit baffling. Also, I have an eternal vendetta against it for making the Sun start their ridiculous 'Unmask Burial' campaign.
but I kind of enjoy it, essecialy when there's someone I care about up for nomination. This year I'm not that fussed about it unfortunatly. I think the last time I agreed fully with the winner was when Dizzee won it, thats still one of my favourite albums. Then the last time it introduced me to something I'd not known about before that I really love now is with Polar Bear's Held on the Tips of Fingers. So yeah its just a bit of fun really.
Not in a 'devil-may-care' way. I just don't really care if other people don't like what I like. I don't need the validation and I don't feel a sense of entitlement on the behalf of the bands I do like. I'd imagine that's true of everyone over the age of 17.
So I do now.
It's an award for the best British/Irish album of the year. I don't care if the British/Irish bands I like either get nominated or win.
it's just interesting to see who's been nominated, it brings up discussion, starts debate, gets people arguing - always a good thing in my book. and it gets certain artists mainstream attention that they wouldn't get otherwise. so yeah, i do care in the sense that i don't ignore it, and i take an interest in it. not in the sense that i'm going to be infuriated about who wins it
I can see where you're coming from but I don't need a pretty arbritary panel of people making arbritrary decisions about music that was released in a really quite arbritrary timeframe to get into debate with people. That's probably quite obvious!
I'm not sure I'm properly following your point anyway. Why would the nominations bring up discussions or arguments unless you felt that band X deserved to win or band band Y should never have been nominated? Seems a bit of a tautological argument to me.
A British Indie Band sell a few more copies of their album and some unknown obscure fella with a penny-whistle gets his 15 minutes.
The random people get a crate of beer and sit down and decide which of the albums on this list they hate the least, then get a spokesperson to say that they 'fully deserved it, what a year, etc'.
Kinda pointless, but sort-of nice when a band I like win, like Yeovil getting promotion or something. I'm sure it means something to someone, and I quite like Yeovil, but I find it hard to truly get excited.
just trying to second guess this group of random musical bods who seemingly have no set criteria by which to judge the winner. Will they go for the "groundbreaking" one? The up and comers? The "just good tunes" one? The "probably should have won it a few years ago" one? Or the out there one that nobody would expect for the sake of them not expecting it? You can imagine the little cogs whirrrrring around in their brains as they try to work out which one ticks the most unnecessary/imagined boxes on the Mercury charter
i reckon The Horrors will win
A few years ago when it was a fairly new "alternative" award that tended to reward something that other awards might have missed I think it had a function.
Nowadays the majority of the Mercury shortlist is nigh-on indistinugishable from the Brit Awards shortlist, with a couple of unknowns thrown in to keep up appearances so I just don't see what the function is.
But to other (many more) people it probably isn't. It'd be great if it was for bands who released their debut record or say, hadn't had a record in the Top 40 or whatever, but it's sort of half and half now with perhaps not as many people being pleased if it was one hting or the other.
I wish they'd do what the Polaris Award does and introduce a sales cap so it really was an alternative to the more mainstream music prizes. I think it'd be a much more worthwhile venture that way.
That's not really true, is it?
Apart from Florence & The Machine, there isn't a single act in the 2009 Mercury Music Prize shortlist that was nominated for the 2009 Brit Awards.
Even if you look at the 2008 shortlist, less than half of the names on the list (Adele, Last Shadow Puppets, Estelle, Elbow, Radiohead) made it 6 months later as a 2009 Brit Award nominee.
I mean you have to remember that this has 12 nominees whereas all the Brit Award categories have 5 nominees so in each category.
I mean not all then get selected but to me the intial point of the Mercury prize was to draw attention of bands that conventional award ceremonies overlook but I'd say of the tweleve nominees 6 or 7 would be acts a very good chance of being nominated for the Brits and you do then wonder what the function of the Mercury then is if it's bringing attention to acts who already have that attention.
I really question the need for this kind of prize if most of the acts are already pretty known/or have significant backing...
or The Horrors.
then the Mercurys are as pointless as the Brits as far as I'm concerned.
listen to me nattering on 6music LOLZ http://www.bbc.co.uk/musicevents/mercuryprize/2009/nominations/friendlyfires/video4.shtml#emp
and I would probably (*) vote for her as well, much as I love The Horrors' album and The Invisible.
Mind you, I have not seen Speech Debelle live, and seeing a band live is important to me in formulating an opinion.
plan to see SD at Bestival.
I'd put that down to the tasteless judges more than anything.
Maybe not 'care', but I find following the journalism and build-up really interesting. I love the days before the shortlist is announced where so many names you've never heard of before are predicted, I listen to them all, love them, and then the shortlist seems so disappointing.
It's unarguably the most respected album award in this country. They rarely make the 'right' choices (according to people on this website, myself, critics, probably most individuals on the panel) but it gets people talking about music, raises awareness for lesser known but very good artists, showcases a usually decent cross-section of British music, shows that the form of the album is still relevant, and (more cynically) it increases sales for many record labels. If I released an album, this would be the prize I'd want to win... even if it doesn't say too much about the quality of the album.
It's the music equivalent to the Booker Prize which is also infamous for its questionable decisions, but they both do their jobs, and I can't see either of them disappearing, even if bloggers and half of the internet population claim they don't care.
although florence deserves it. if only to shut up the old farts who keep comparing her to kate bush just because she's a girl and has long hair and one of her song mentions a rabbit.
I'd probably care a little if one of the nominees was a band I liked and needed the coverage but otherwise it's not something to get excited about. It doesn't mean anything, why would I want to know the opinions of a few judges? Whether I agree or disagree with their choice is irrelevant and so the award is not worth wasting my time on. It's not even interesting from a neutral perspective.
I'm struggling to think of a reason why it should exist except for the exposure it gives a few less well known acts, particularly the token jazz/classical etc. records, although there must be a better may of doing this.
i can feel it in my waters. Not least because they need to give it to a woman this year
No money down? No, money down!
but at the same time it's something i watch if it's on and i think for as long as it's been going the "clear" favourite has never won. Even on the night it seems the odds change right up until the last.
Quite commercial acts have won it in the last few years, i'm convinced it'll go to one of the more obscure artists this time around.
speech debelle, led bib, lisa hannigan or sweet billy pilgrim
the point of people being so negative about the whole thing! it's interesting, gets people talking about music (the key!!!) and thus more people listening to music too! thus i wouldn't say i am hanging onto every piece of news on the matter but i will look forward to seeing who wins! (horrors, though i like the invisible)
Genuinely ace list this year.
Of which my prediction goes to: http://bit.ly/arYbS
Get your money on, it's a CERT.
I don't have a clue what the guy's going on about. Or at least, I don't have a clue what he's going on about when he seems to be saying something which might actually constitute a worthwhile opinion.
"More troublesome is the Mercury's insistence on evaluating classical against folk against jazz: each genre always gets a token album on the shortlist. It would be wonderful if, just once, there were 10 classical albums in the competition, alongside the latest Robbie Williams LP."
So what? He doesn't think music from different genres can't be compared? Or he doesn't like folk or jazz? Or he just thinks there's a flaw in the way music from different genres is compared, rather than the fact that it actually is? I genuinely don't know. Then he says "as cross-sections go, the list isn't a bad one", and I'm even more flummoxed.
Regarding the idea that the award has lost its original focus, I don't really think that's true. Look at the first 3 winners: Primal Scream, Suede, M People. The merits of each might be debatable but I don't think any could have ever been accused of pushing the boundaries, and even less so of needing exposure. Then Antony and the Johnsons in 2005 - I think that's more the sort of music I want my "alternative" music prize to be recognising - oh, but then back to Elbow in 2008.
I don't think it's changed much, it's just easier to hate on it as it is right now, in this instant. It's always been rubbish.
I don't really see how he can reconcile it with the rest of what he said.
The Mercury. Only one award, innit.
I actually care more about something like the Brit and NME Awards than The Mercury Prize. At least everyone knows they are a load of piss and the acts just go to get smashed at the party. The same acts win all the time, like Sugababes or Girls Aloud (both of which are infinitely more interesting than most of the people nominated by the Mercury Prize) or whoever NME is endorsing at the time, and you really watch it for the outlandish performances and cool clothes. But the Mercury is about a bunch of po-faced spods sitting around going "Florence and Maxine have made an IMPORTANT album, so we should give them the aware then the world will know how IMPORTANT it is because there'll be a sticker on the CD saying 'IMPORTANT - MERCURY WINNER'." It's extremely boring.
Surely Florence and the Machine will win everything anyway?
There's no denying it's pretentious.
I personally don't care much for any award for that matter, but it could have some positive/negative effect for the artist, depends on how you look at it. Could become a big push and a lot of people will at least check out the nominees, just think of Elbow last year. Now they tour with Coldplay!
This award used to be based on music that pushes the boundaries of popular music. For that reason out the nominated Florence or that Speech Debelle girl will win the prize. There are a number of acts from outside these shores who's albums pee all over both but aye! UK acts are a bit behind the rest of the world this year. There is an album by Micachu and the Shapes that is head and shoulders above all here, and it is a travesty of injustice that it was not nominated Shame on you the panel...
I cared when you used to get the nominees comp cd free with the paper.
It's all about the Ivor Novellos now am I right