Mercury nominations

[dentalplan]

Nadine Shah looks like a right dickhead here.

The 1975’s album was better than hers too.

[lessthanwill1]

Lankum, Westerman, Keely Forsyth and Beatrice Dillon are my outside picks. 

[Mattymooz]

No surprise that the guy she is advocating should be on the judging panel also rated her album very well (it was no. 7 on that list of "top 100 albums so far" where people hadnt heard of 90% of the albums)...

[Quark]

10 minutes ago, dentalplan said:

Nadine Shah looks like a right dickhead here.

The 1975’s album was better than hers too.

Did you make it all the way through it without dozing off? I'm impressed

[Guy Incognito]

Did not know that Beatrice Dillon was British, she is also well deserving of a nomination. Lorraine James would be a good choice too but reckon even I've got more chance of a nomination than her. 

[lessthanwill1]

26 minutes ago, Guy Incognito said:

Did not know that Beatrice Dillon was British, she is also well deserving of a nomination. Lorraine James would be a good choice too but reckon even I've got more chance of a nomination than her. 

Another one championed by the Quietus!

[ogriff]

Not sure about these arguments about what the Mercury's are "for" - my understanding is that they were created to give an end of summer boost to record sales at a slow time of year pre-xmas.  It's just a record industry ruse to drive sales - not entirely unsurprising that the same industry will push some of the biggest names (though the big guns rarely win it due to the planned diversity of the judging panel)?

[Brave Sir Robin]

The 1975 are already massive, and no-one even thinks this was their best album, do they? Absolutely not what this award should be about.

"It is the music equivalent to the Booker Prize for literature and the Turner Prize for art.

The main objectives of the Prize are to recognise and celebrate artistic achievement, provide a snapshot of the year in music and to help introduce new albums from a range of music genres to a wider audience."

https://www.mercuryprize.com/about-the-prize

[gigpusher]

1 minute ago, Brave Sir Robin said:

The 1975 are already massive, and no-one even thinks this was their best album, do they? Absolutely not what this award should be about.

"It is the music equivalent to the Booker Prize for literature and the Turner Prize for art.

The main objectives of the Prize are to recognise and celebrate artistic achievement, provide a snapshot of the year in music and to help introduce new albums from a range of music genres to a wider audience."

https://www.mercuryprize.com/about-the-prize

For me how famous they are shouldn't be relevant (obviously winning it will have a bigger impact on a smaller artist but it should be about the best albums as a whole)

I was very surprised to hear 1975, Elbow and Coldplay mentioned not because they are huge artists but because I haven't heard that much buzz about those albums. I wouldn't have any problem with any of them being nominated if they produced a truly great album that everyone was raving about. 

I had no problem with David Bowie - Blackstar being nominated as it was an amazing album. I think Amy Winehouse - Back To Black was robbed as it's probably one of the best albums of the past 20 years. I think Dave - Psychodrama was an absolutely worthy winner in a very strong year. I'd just hate it to get to a stage where it feels like if  X have released an album they have to be nominated or the biggest commercial success is nominated even if as an album it isn't all that. 

[dentalplan]

54 minutes ago, Brave Sir Robin said:

The 1975 are already massive, and no-one even thinks this was their best album, do they? Absolutely not what this award should be about.

"It is the music equivalent to the Booker Prize for literature and the Turner Prize for art.

The main objectives of the Prize are to recognise and celebrate artistic achievement, provide a snapshot of the year in music and to help introduce new albums from a range of music genres to a wider audience."

https://www.mercuryprize.com/about-the-prize

The 1975 got some strong reviews on this one. Their score on Pitchfork was higher than Shah’s for this record even if it’s a more divisive record than they’ve had previous. There’s absolutely no way that massive bands should be exempt if they are releasing albums that receive acclaim.

It’s not like a critically irrelevant sales beast like Lewis Capaldi has been thrown in - or I assume he hasn’t from Nadine Shah’s tirade - so she’s shown herself up as arrogant in this debacle.

[Quark]

14 minutes ago, dentalplan said:

The 1975 got some strong reviews on this one. Their score on Pitchfork was higher than Shah’s for this record even if it’s a more divisive record than they’ve had previous. There’s absolutely no way that massive bands should be exempt if they are releasing albums that receive acclaim.

It’s not like a critically irrelevant sales beast like Lewis Capaldi has been thrown in - or I assume he hasn’t from Nadine Shah’s tirade - so she’s shown herself up as arrogant in this debacle.

Also got a few duff ones though. A metacritic score of 6.9 doesn't exactly scream critical acclaim.

I'm pretty indifferent to Nadine Shah's album btw  (sorry @gigpusher! ) so not making the case that she should have been in there, just not convinced that 1975 should have been either.

[gigpusher]

1 minute ago, Quark said:

Also got a few duff ones though. A metacritic score of 6.9 doesn't exactly scream critical acclaim.

I'm pretty indifferent to Nadine Shah's album btw  (sorry @gigpusher! ) so not making the case that she should have been in there, just not convinced that 1975 should have been either.

No worries not everyone is for everyone and that is ok. I'm actually very curious about the nominations now to see if it is just sour grapes from Nadine or whether the Mercury's is becoming blander and less useful. I do like that it has usually introduced me to some artists that I probably wouldn't have listened to otherwise so would hate to see it get too mainstream. 

[Tuna]

2 hours ago, lessthanwill1 said:

Lankum, Westerman, Keely Forsyth and Beatrice Dillon are my outside picks. 

Beatrice Dillon would be a great pick - Workaround is amazing - but I can't see it happening, at all, unfortunately. 

[Brave Sir Robin]

28 minutes ago, dentalplan said:

The 1975 got some strong reviews on this one. Their score on Pitchfork was higher than Shah’s for this record even if it’s a more divisive record than they’ve had previous. There’s absolutely no way that massive bands should be exempt if they are releasing albums that receive acclaim.

Lol, Pitchfork gave the 1975 8.0 and Shah's 7.9! Her album has generally been critically acclaimed and theirs has not. See eg Metacritic (69 v 86) or the more UK-centric AnyDecentMusic (6.7 v 8.0). So if it's about 'acclaim' Shah's is absolutely the one that should be there.

Not saying big bands should be excluded, but if it isn't even their own best album, I don't think they should be there.

Anyway I agree Kiwanuka will surely win this. Although I'd give it to Keeley Forsyth (and hope she manages to make a nomination, although I don't expect it).

[gigpusher]

If you look at Nadine Shah's previous tweets she actually thinks Richard Dawson should win and based on her tweets I'm going to guess he hasn't been nominated either. 

[maelzoid]

I think I tuned out of the mercurys when M People won. Looking back on the list of winners, they just as often miss as they hit - picking albums that seem good at the time but have no lasting impact or are remembered particularly fondly.

For once I'm going to side with the Radiohead fans and agree that their lack of a win feels like an oversight. 

Personally I think the lack of any recognition for Steven Wilson and Porcupine Tree is borderline criminal. I think Hand.Cannot.Erase. is a better album than any that have ever been nominated, let alone won...

I don't know who Nadine Shah is, but throwing a tantrum about not getting nominated for an industry award is pathetic. 

[Padjeq]

I'd see Grime MC by JME getting a shout. Or at least it should.

Do you have to pay to have your work submit? Or can the panel just choose whatever they want for the shortlist?

[gigpusher]

13 minutes ago, Padjeq said:

I'd see Grime MC by JME getting a shout. Or at least it should.

Do you have to pay to have your work submit? Or can the panel just choose whatever they want for the shortlist?

HOW MUCH DOES IT COST TO ENTER?

The fee to enter an album for the Prize is £150 + VAT. The fee helps cover the administrative costs associated with the process.

Some artists don't pay so sometimes when people complain about someone not being nominated they will never have been an option. 

[dentalplan]

54 minutes ago, Brave Sir Robin said:

Lol, Pitchfork gave the 1975 8.0 and Shah's 7.9! Her album has generally been critically acclaimed and theirs has not. See eg Metacritic (69 v 86) or the more UK-centric AnyDecentMusic (6.7 v 8.0). So if it's about 'acclaim' Shah's is absolutely the one that should be there.

Not saying big bands should be excluded, but if it isn't even their own best album, I don't think they should be there.

Anyway I agree Kiwanuka will surely win this. Although I'd give it to Keeley Forsyth (and hope she manages to make a nomination, although I don't expect it).

Yeah, I just said it was a divisive album. It had five star reviews and one star reviews.

But you’re missing the point. Nadine Shah is talking about it like The 1975’s inclusion is a slight against good music, yet the same place that rated her album highly rated theirs higher.

Whether it’s their best album or not (I think it is) is a pretty dumb route to go down. I think Kitchen Sink is not Shah’s best album but I wouldn’t have argued against its inclusion.

[dentalplan]

Blossoms were once nominated for this award by the way.

[maelzoid]

3 minutes ago, dentalplan said:

Blossoms were once nominated for this award by the way.

As were Kaiser Chiefs.

But I think I've made my point.

[Brave Sir Robin]

3 hours ago, dentalplan said:

Yeah, I just said it was a divisive album. It had five star reviews and one star reviews.

But you’re missing the point. Nadine Shah is talking about it like The 1975’s inclusion is a slight against good music, yet the same place that rated her album highly rated theirs higher.

Whether it’s their best album or not (I think it is) is a pretty dumb route to go down. I think Kitchen Sink is not Shah’s best album but I wouldn’t have argued against its inclusion.

Hmmm, this 1975 album got more of a slating than you're letting on. Certainly worse reviews than either of their previous two.

You make it sound like only one place rated Shah's, which is far from the case: http://www.anydecentmusic.com/review/12457/Nadine-Shah-Kitchen-Sink.aspx. Take the Line of Best Fit: 9/10 for Shah, 3/10 for 1975. Or the Independent 4/5 for Shah, 1/5 for 1975.

I think this award should, and in the past generally has (as that 'expose to new audiences' criteria emphasises), lean towards new acts. I'm OK with it including big acts, but only if they've done something really good - certainly it ought to be their own best album. I think including big acts every time they've done something half decent is pointless, or as you'd have it "a pretty dumb route to go down".

Edited July 22, 2020 by Brave Sir Robin

[gigpusher]

2 hours ago, Brave Sir Robin said:

Hmmm, this 1975 album got more of a slating than you're letting on. Certainly worse reviews than either of their previous two.

You make it sound like only one place rated Shah's, which is far from the case: http://www.anydecentmusic.com/review/12457/Nadine-Shah-Kitchen-Sink.aspx. Take the Line of Best Fit: 9/10 for Shah, 3/10 for 1975. Or the Independent 4/5 for Shah, 1/5 for 1975.

I think this award should, and in the past generally has (as that 'expose to new audiences' criteria emphasises), lean towards new acts. I'm OK with it including big acts, but only if they've done something really good - certainly it ought to be their own best album. I think including big acts every time they've done something half decent is pointless, or as you'd have it "a pretty dumb route to go down".

Yep think we're on the same page on this one. I've kind of lost track of voting will try and tot them up in the morning but Kiwanuka seems a clear winner and that['s as it should be for me. If he's not on the list all sense and reason has been lost. 

[dentalplan]

5 hours ago, Brave Sir Robin said:

Hmmm, this 1975 album got more of a slating than you're letting on. Certainly worse reviews than either of their previous two.

You make it sound like only one place rated Shah's, which is far from the case: http://www.anydecentmusic.com/review/12457/Nadine-Shah-Kitchen-Sink.aspx. Take the Line of Best Fit: 9/10 for Shah, 3/10 for 1975. Or the Independent 4/5 for Shah, 1/5 for 1975.

I think this award should, and in the past generally has (as that 'expose to new audiences' criteria emphasises), lean towards new acts. I'm OK with it including big acts, but only if they've done something really good - certainly it ought to be their own best album. I think including big acts every time they've done something half decent is pointless, or as you'd have it "a pretty dumb route to go down".

I literally said it got 1-star reviews in the post you quoted. What you bolded is true, but you’ve read something else out of it that I wasn’t saying.

You’re doing your best to avoid the point I’m making. She’s acted like a critically irrelevant megastar has scooped a nomination instead of her, this is not true and acting this way has made her look like a twat.

And yes, comparing one piece of art to a previous piece is useless here. Compare it to the other albums that had come out that year instead. It says nothing about being the act's magnum opus in the criteria.

Edited July 22, 2020 by dentalplan

[priest17]

No one having Sorry or HMLTD? 

 

Gonna look a wallie when the next post is the link to the noms and neither are there.