independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Wed 17th Jul 2019 9:29pm
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Prince: Music and More > Please explain to me why and how Prince only has 7 grammies???!!!
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 1 of 4 1234>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Author

Tweet     Share

Message
Thread started 02/11/08 2:27pm

Revolution

avatar

Please explain to me why and how Prince only has 7 grammies???!!!

Grammies are about Music...Prince is music.

I understand how a pathetic public has slept on Prince's music, but
the "Academy" should know what's what in melodies and what-nots...

Prince got slept on once again...

Oh well, I still like ALL the stuff...thumbs up!
Thanks for the laughs, arguments and overall enjoyment for the last umpteen years. It's time for me to retire from Prince.org and engage in the real world...lol. Above all, I appreciated the talent Prince. You were one of a kind.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #1 posted 02/11/08 2:28pm

Revolution

avatar

...and two of them are recent...Call My Name and FBM...

WTF?
Thanks for the laughs, arguments and overall enjoyment for the last umpteen years. It's time for me to retire from Prince.org and engage in the real world...lol. Above all, I appreciated the talent Prince. You were one of a kind.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #2 posted 02/11/08 2:49pm

chakah

He's good - but I'd have to agree with his grammy wins. He makes good music - but not grammy award winning each year. He's no Stevie Wonder (28 Grammies) or George Solti (31 Grammies). Other facts - Quincy Jones nominated for 79 - WOW. Love the fact that Herbie Hancock gets Record of the year.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #3 posted 02/11/08 2:59pm

Accujack

chakah said:

He's good - but I'd have to agree with his grammy wins. He makes good music - but not grammy award winning each year. He's no Stevie Wonder (28 Grammies) or George Solti (31 Grammies). Other facts - Quincy Jones nominated for 79 - WOW. Love the fact that Herbie Hancock gets Record of the year.

Considering that Winehouse won 5 Grammy awards last night and John Legend won 4, I'd say it is absolute travesty that Prince only has 7.
I personally don't see anything special about Winehouse or Legend, but even if you do, you can't possibly believe that they should be any where near Prince in Grammy wins.
I love Stevie Wonder, and I can see him having more Grammys than Prince, but not 21 more! No fucking way.
Prince should have won 7 Grammys from the Purple Rain album alone.
[Edited 2/11/08 14:59pm]
[Edited 2/11/08 15:05pm]
He is exactly who we thought he was
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #4 posted 02/11/08 3:02pm

JuliePurplehea
d

avatar

Britney Spears has a Grammy so that should tell you something about the Academy.
Shake it til ya make it dancing jig
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #5 posted 02/11/08 3:04pm

Jeffiner

Accujack said:

chakah said:

He's good - but I'd have to agree with his grammy wins. He makes good music - but not grammy award winning each year. He's no Stevie Wonder (28 Grammies) or George Solti (31 Grammies). Other facts - Quincy Jones nominated for 79 - WOW. Love the fact that Herbie Hancock gets Record of the year.

Considering that Winehouse won 5 Grammy awards last night and John Legend won 4, I'd say it is absolute travesty that Prince only has 7.
I personally don't see anything special about Winehouse or Legend, but even if you do, you can't possibly believe that they should be any where near Prince in Grammy wins.
I love Stevie Wonder, and I can see him having more Grammies than Prince, but not 21 more! No fucking way.
Prince should have won 7 Grammies from the Purple Rain album alone.
[Edited 2/11/08 14:59pm]


nod That's for sure - he's been robbed!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #6 posted 02/11/08 3:16pm

blackbob

avatar

.....think that 7 is bad ?????....music legend david bowie has never won a grammy to my knowledge ?????,,,,,wtf.... eek
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #7 posted 02/11/08 3:19pm

Accujack

Correction. I was wrong. Kanye won 4 last night, and John Legend has won 5 over the last two years.
He is exactly who we thought he was
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #8 posted 02/11/08 3:26pm

tricky2

Here's your answer!

Top 5 Grammy Goofs!

Jethro Tull over Metallica (1989): Notoriously slow on the uptake, the Recording Academy didn't get around to adding a Heavy Metal Grammy until 1989. Even then, only two of the nominees made sense – Iron Maiden and Metallica. Def Leppard was one Aquanet can away from being a Hair Band, the Grateful Dead was hippie music, and prog-rock Jethro Tull was far too ponderous to be considered "hard," let alone "metal." Metallica was the obvious favorite. When it didn't, Jethro Tull was forced to accept its award under a shower of outraged boos. Meanwhile, in a "Dewey Wins!" turn, Metallica was saddled with thousands of "Metallica – Grammy winners" T-shirts. Tull's victory was so incongruous, it seemed the gods were punishing Metallica for its hubris. In 1992, when Metallica finally won the first of six Grammys, the '89 loss was not forgotten. In his acceptance speech, Metallica drummer Lars Ulrich told the audience, "Thanks to Jethro Tull for not putting out an album this year."

DJ Jazzy Jeff & the Fresh Prince over Public Enemy (1989): Turns out Grammy had a lot of catching up to do in '89, when along with Heavy Metal, it finally added a Rap category. Maybe the additions were too much for voters to process. One might consider giving props for the inclusion of notoriously antiestablishment Public Enemy in the nominees. But the final choice of a family-friendly rap twosome over hard-hitting innovators was a slap in the face. Will Smith and his pal were witty and accessible, and that's OK. But while the non-threatening duo brought hip-hop to the mainstream with "Parents Just Don't Understand," Public Enemy was changing the hip-hop landscape.

The New Vaudeville Band's "Winchester Cathedral" (1966): Hey, who doesn't love good kitsch? But there's a time and a place. Written by Tin Pan Alley songwriter Geoff Stephens and recorded speakeasy jazz style by studio musicians, "Winchester Cathedral" became a surprise novelty hit. The touring version of Band featured a different set of musicians who worked the British shtick – the lead singer was billed as "Tristram, Seventh Earl of Cricklewood." This goofy song won over not one but five serious contenders: The Association's "Cherish," the Monkees' "Last Train to Clarksville," the Mamas and the Papas' "Monday Monday," the Beach Boys' "Good Vibrations" and the Beatles' "Eleanor Rigby." Who should have won? Take your pick. (Yeah, yeah, the Monkees were a fake band too, but "Last Train to Clarksville" is a great song and you know it.)

Taste of Honey wins over Elvis Costello (1979): There comes a time in every young person's life when she discovers that the word is a random place full of injustice. For at least one budding music geek, it was the '79 Grammys. Back before "Frasier" guest spots and talk-show gigs, Elvis Costello was angry and passionate. His music was eclectic – playing with every genre from soul to reggae. His lyrics in "Allison" and "Watching the Detectives" spoke volumes in compact phrases. Elvis Costello sounded like the future. Turns out, he was. With the exception of some insidiously catchy tunes, disco was all but over. Case in point: Taste of Honey's big hit, "Boogie Oogie Oogie." Where exactly did Grammy think that road was going?

Milli Vanilli wins Best New Artist (1990): Here's a Grammy win so egregious, it seems the Academy can't admit it ever happened. Seriously! Go to the official Grammy Web site and search the database for Milli Vanilli. You won't find it. Long before Ashlee Simpson, Milli Vanilli was stripped of its win after handsome frontmen Rob Pilatus and Fabrice Morvan were revealed as lip-synchers extraordinaires. While the practice was common in European disco (and among some U.S. pop stars), the red-faced Academy found it unconscionable. The repossessed gramophone wasn't handed to any of the other contenders: Neneh Cherry, Soul II Soul, Tone-Loc and the still-working Indigo Girls. Instead, the Academy blocked the incident from its collective memory, like some horrible trauma. Or maybe like any misguided dictatorship, Grammy is attempting to rewrite history. Either way, remember the wise words of George Santayana: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." Seacrest out!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #9 posted 02/11/08 3:29pm

themusicthatco
unts

In comparison to other artists(if we can compare him as they seem to use the word 'incomparable' about every singer on US tv these days! they love that word eh!) then yep he should have more but 7 is his fav number smile
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #10 posted 02/11/08 3:32pm

Stereo

ahead of his time: right before he was born, God accidently pushed the 1958 button instead of the 2008 button, (on his big space-time computer in the sky)

it's only now they hall of fame 1999, so that proves my theory. lol
dont worry baby, aint nuthin new, thats just love sneakin up on you ~ bonnie rait
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #11 posted 02/11/08 3:40pm

lspear76

avatar

Back when Prince was making his best music, the Grammy show was even more of a farce than it is now, but in a different way. Over the past several years, the biggest selling records win awards. Back in the 80's, it didn't matter much if a record sold or not. These days it's more commercial. The Grammys are useless though. I didn't think anyone still watched them or cared at all. I don't even watch network tv, and the last album I purchased was 3121. I don't buy music at all. Does anybody?
"Don't you think one of the charms of marriage is that it makes deception a necessity for both parties?"
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #12 posted 02/11/08 3:50pm

ritaw

there are lots of amazing artists who have not won any grammies at all including Led Zeppelin, Queen, Neil Young, Doors etc. etc. - so not sure who wotes and how some artists don't get any grammies and others get only a few when they obviously derserve more - can anyone explain?
"C'mon y'all - let me hear you sing, c'mon y'all, shake, c'mon y'all, jump" - Yes Prince -
"London do you feel for me what I feel for you"- yes Prince -
"Can I play my guitar now?" - yes please
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #13 posted 02/11/08 3:55pm

coolcat

7 is a lot. too many actually. Prince is great, but there are too many other great artists that haven't won a single one.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #14 posted 02/11/08 3:55pm

Anxiety

quincy jones and stevie wonder each have 25 grammies, right? and they've been at it significantly longer than even prince has. so that just tells me that prince has more work left to do. smile
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #15 posted 02/11/08 4:05pm

raveun2thejoyf
antastic

avatar

Accujack said:

Prince should have won 7 Grammys from the Purple Rain album alone.


nod Michael Jackson won 8 for Thriller, and same with Carlos Santana for Supernatural. eek
eye wish U were here baby, on me--
Stuck like glue! heart
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #16 posted 02/11/08 4:07pm

Accujack

coolcat said:

7 is a lot. too many actually. Prince is great, but there are too many other great artists that haven't won a single one.

First off. Fantastic music on your myspace page. Great stuff!
About Prince and the Grammys. For a mainstream artist like Prince is/was, and the string of great albums he had in the 80's, 7 is quite low. Some of the other artists mentioned here never achieved the mainstream pop success that Prince did at his peak.
Like I said, with the huge success and critical acclaim that Purple Rain had, he should have won 7 for that album alone.
He is exactly who we thought he was
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #17 posted 02/11/08 4:09pm

coolcat

Accujack said:

coolcat said:

7 is a lot. too many actually. Prince is great, but there are too many other great artists that haven't won a single one.

First off. Fantastic music on your myspace page. Great stuff!
About Prince and the Grammys. For a mainstream artist like Prince is/was, and the string of great albums he had in the 80's, 7 is quite low. Some of the other artists mentioned here never achieved the mainstream pop success that Prince did at his peak.
Like I said, with the huge success and critical acclaim that Purple Rain had, he should have won 7 for that album alone.


Thanks for the compliment! smile And you make a very good point. nod I didn't think about it that way.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #18 posted 02/11/08 4:19pm

SCNDLS

avatar

raveun2thejoyfantastic said:

Accujack said:

Prince should have won 7 Grammys from the Purple Rain album alone.


nod Michael Jackson won 8 for Thriller, and same with Carlos Santana for Supernatural. eek




And since when do Grammys REALLY go to the most musically talented? It's all about marketing and airplay in the most popular categories, which is why Herbie Hancock's win last night is SOOOOO significant.
[Edited 2/11/08 16:21pm]
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #19 posted 02/11/08 4:35pm

ReginaCarman

Well i would LOVE to see Prince with all the Grammies in the world, but there are other people who deserve to be Awarded too, eventhough i think Prince is the BEST. smile
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #20 posted 02/11/08 4:37pm

Bishop31

avatar

Little Richard the Architect of Rock n Roll has never won a Grammy either. So, Prince isn't doing all that bad... lol
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #21 posted 02/11/08 4:42pm

UncleGrandpa

avatar

Maybe its a popularity contest and Prince pissed off the wrong clique back in 82.
Jeux Sans Frontiers
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #22 posted 02/11/08 4:47pm

Accujack

Bishop31 said:

Little Richard the Architect of Rock n Roll has never won a Grammy either. So, Prince isn't doing all that bad... lol

Yeah, but I believe his biggest, most well known songs came a couple of years before the Grammy Awards started.
He is exactly who we thought he was
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #23 posted 02/11/08 4:54pm

Protege

avatar

all u have to do is read off the winners. since when have the grammies been more than 15% about music? lol occasionally someone wins an opinion shaped like a phonograph that's deserved, but more often than not the person who should really win didn't even get nominated. shrug

HE'S COMING AGAIN
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #24 posted 02/11/08 5:43pm

silverchild

avatar

I believe the quirkest moment for him in Grammy history was when he didn't receive the Album of the Year Grammy for Purple Rain nor Sign O The Times. I mean if you look back at 1984-85, Prince ruled the whole pop scene with that whole Purple Rain project. Why in the hell did the folks at the Grammys vote Lionel Richie's Can't Slow Down as AOTY? It was an amazing record and all, but PR was just a monument in music at that time. What do you all think?
Check me out and add me on:
www.last.fm/user/brandosoul
"Truth is, everybody is going to hurt you; you just gotta find the ones worth suffering for." -Bob Marley
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #25 posted 02/11/08 6:02pm

Paris9748430

I'm actually O.K. with U2 winning Album of the Year over Sign O' the Times. But it's inexcusable that he didn't win Album of the Year for Purple Rain!!!

I'm not saying that The Joshua Tree was a better record than Sign, but I can see the Grammy voters would vote for it. Purple Rain defintely has had a bigger cultural impact than Lionel's record.

You also have to remember, there weren't that many people who were bigger in 1984 than Prince & Lionel Richie.
JERKIN' EVERYTHING IN SIGHT!!!!!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #26 posted 02/11/08 6:15pm

gyro34

Some of those grammmies that went to Miss Winehouse should have been for Prince.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #27 posted 02/11/08 6:18pm

silverchild

avatar

gyro34 said:

Some of those grammmies that went to Miss Winehouse should have been for Prince.


Do you mean the Grammys that went to her should've went to him back in the day or last night?
Check me out and add me on:
www.last.fm/user/brandosoul
"Truth is, everybody is going to hurt you; you just gotta find the ones worth suffering for." -Bob Marley
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #28 posted 02/11/08 6:25pm

gyro34

silverchild said:

gyro34 said:

Some of those grammmies that went to Miss Winehouse should have been for Prince.


Do you mean the Grammys that went to her should've went to him back in the day or last night?


Last night. I think Winehouse is the new Nora Jones. Nora Snora zzz
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #29 posted 02/11/08 6:29pm

Anxiety

gyro34 said:

silverchild said:



Do you mean the Grammys that went to her should've went to him back in the day or last night?


Last night. I think Winehouse is the new Nora Jones. Nora Snora zzz


except amy is actually talented AND interesting. i thought her grammy performance sunday night was the best i've seen her yet.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 1 of 4 1234>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Prince: Music and More > Please explain to me why and how Prince only has 7 grammies???!!!