Out of all the Grammys ever given out, anything given to U2 has been definitely well deserved. If you are not into rock, cool, but dont dismiss them because of your narrow tastes in music.
Joshua Tree and SOTT are both legendary albums, too different to compare.

SUPRMAN said:

Mine either. "Dreamer" is the best of the category, but this is the Grammy's and travesties like this one happen all the time, which is why I don't usually watch them.



On a side note, Prince should have two nominations in that category because "Colonized Mind" is one of the best rock songs I have heard in years.

I love Dreamer but can someone tell me, how did, lets say non-Prince people find out about it when it was probably not played on the radio at least here in Dallas on the mix stations, rock stations, and show not on r&b/hip hop stations, that I know of???

Because usually Grammys are won by people have a least heard of the song, the only people I know that know Dreamer are Prince fans or heard it on Leno the night he played it? Just Curious?

bellanoche said:

Not to get back off track, but this was a bigger travesty IMO....

I don't think Grammy people are non-Prince people to begin with. Most musicians I know worship Prince. I imagine like any other fan, they just simply seek his music.

tomato said:

The Grammys are voted by an industry in-crowd that has definitely listened to him tear that song up live.
He played the hell out of Dreamer at those three LA gigs, on Leno, and at Montreux & Monaco..all atteneded by industry types.

bellanoche said:

Let me get this out of the way first: I am not a U2 fan. That said, you're letting your love for Prince cloud your judgement.

Average band? Limited appeal? The Joshua Tree has sold 25 million copies and produced 3 #1 singles. The same can not be sad for Sign O The Times. 22 years later, U2 is one of the two or thre biggest bands in the world. The same cannont be said for Prince.

As for the production issues, are you serioulsy suggesting that the production on Whintey's album better than the work of BRIAN FUCKING ENO? That's ridiculous.

Again, I too am disappointed that Prince didn't take home that Grammy, but you're coming across like yet another closeminded Prince fan, incapable of looking anything involving Prince without rose-coloured glasses.

TwiliteKid said:

Well, I will also come off as one too cause I have always felt that that was one of the most outrageous moments of the Grammys. I also had listened to the Joshua Tree which was a great collections of songs but What does Brian Eno supposed to mean to me or anyone who listens to soul or rhythm and blues. Although I knew who he was but he has never made any music that made me dance. He is good in his field but has he ever ventured into different sounds or is he just a rock producer which has no impact on certain sections of the world.

TwiliteKid said:

Let me state the obvious - you don't know me. I am not letting my love for Prince cloud anything. Your dismissive comments show that you have a bias that does not allow you to consider that I might actually have an opinion that has nothing to do with liking Prince's music. Don't get me confused with some other folks on here.

First off, I love music, good music - period. Prince is my favorite artist, but he is not all that I listen to, no where close to it. I was not disappointed that Prince didn't win. I was insulted by the travesty of giving U2 an award they did not deserve when there were three other artists/producers/ablums that were far more deserving. I am not a huge Whitney or MJ fan, but I would have been cool with either of those albums winning over Prince that year despite SOTT being one of my favorite albums.

You can throw sales and chart figures around all day long. They do not and have not ever connoted "greatness" to me. There are many AMAZING songs and albums that haven't sold squat. Britney Spears has sold millions and had multiple number ones as well, so what does that mean? Are any of her albums better than "Bad," "SOTT" or "Whitney?"

I have always felt that U2 is one of the most overrated bands of all time. I don't care how many albums they have sold. Their appeal is limited. They are a one-dimensional band. Their music only appeals to a certain kind of listener. Whitney, MJ and Prince, however, have further reaching appeal, whether they sell the same numbers as U2 or not. Their music crosses genres and attracts diverse listeners.

Prince, Quincy and Narada as producers have worked with many different artists and created great music in different genres. I am not overwhelmed by Brian Eno as a producer. I never have been. So, yes, for an 80's pop album, I will say that Narada Michael Walden's production work is better and was more deserving of that award than the U2 album. I am not a fan of that style of music, but that Whitney album spawned several 80's pop staples.

Finally, U2 is very much an average band when it comes to musical ability. At best, they are competent musicians. However, there is NOTHING awe inspiring or special about their musicianship - nothing! Their songs are basic rock songs. People love them, and I get that. They buy their albums and go to their stadium shows. However, that doesn't make them any better musicians. Bono isn't a great singer, The Edge isn't a great guitarist, Adam Clayton isn't a great bassist and Larry Mullen Jr. isn't a great drummer. They are all AVERAGE.

TwiliteKid said:

I always thought that music was for dancing. And what was up with the Soul Train reference?? And some of those names have never been on any playlist that I have listened to. Baaba Maal??? Never even heard that name before. But like I said in the beginning that I was one of those peeps who thought that he should have won that award. You don't so what. We like different things which is cool but Brian Eno still does mean a hill of beans to me as far as funky music cause I don't see him associated with anything funky whereas Prince can rock and funk with the best of them. Can U2 get funky??? Answer me that, music educator.

Well, I am pleased that Prince is nominated and sorry if this got offtrack with the U2 convo cause I was just saying what I felt and didn't even think of anything racial until TK brought up the Soul Train awards??? I really hope that Prince not only wins but performs. It would also be interesting to see which band he would perform with. I don't really know much of the other songs cause they aren't played on the pop station that I listen to while I work. Go Prince Go!!!

jimmyrogertodd said:

It doesn't have to be relevant to you to be worthy. Mozart doesn't make you dance either does he? Nor is he relevant to "anyone who listens to soul or rhythm and blues [REALLY?!]" The man was a genius. Genre has nothing to do with that. The point being, is that good is good.

R & B artist are unsung anyways. Look @ Rolling Stones 500 Greatest List. I don't see too much of anything that I grew up on. Or what my mama, daddy, my grand pa or even dear ol' gramaw liston'd to either. (Feel me) I mean the Beatles & Bob Dylon (I'm sure) was the shit but give me a break already. There was so many other artist that weren't even mentioned that has influenced generations. Sign O' The Times like so many others should have received acknowledgement. Yeah U2 might do they shit well or even the best but P did they shit very well too & so much more on Sign O' Times alone. I have seen so many greatest lists were VERY INFLUENTIAL artist like Prince, Stevie Wonder, Marvin Gaye, Smokey Robinson, Ron Isley, Luther Vandross, Rick James, Maurice White, Curtis Mayfield, George Clinton, Sly Stone & Lionel Richie left off, why is that? Screw the Grammy's & those freakin'greastest lists. U Dig!?

SUPRMAN said:

And it is also about opinions. Your good doesn't equate with my good. Ya'dig. Mozart can be danced to so that doesn't stop my theory of being able to dance to it. Waltzing is considered dancing if I am not mistaken. And Brian Eno still doesn't mean much to me cause he doesn't make the kind of music that I dance to. No more and no less okay. Go Prince Go.

SUPRMAN said:

And it is also about opinions. Your good doesn't equate with my good. Ya'dig. Mozart can be danced to so that doesn't stop my theory of being able to dance to it. Waltzing is considered dancing if I am not mistaken. And Brian Eno still doesn't mean much to me cause he doesn't make the kind of music that I dance to. No more and no less okay. Go Prince Go.

jimmyrogertodd said:

But I take it you don't waltz.
You don't think people dance to U2?

jimmyrogertodd said:

That's not what I'm saying, what I'm saying is you don't have to like it for it to still be good. There's good country music, but I don't listen to country at all. Doesn't mean it can't be great just because I have different tastes.

oh my lord...Prince is up against THE rock guys....Bruce, Bob, Neil and John. He is NEVER gonna get that award.

However I will say that it is amazing that he is definitely the underdog in that race. That is surely an out of left field nomination.

Nominated for best rock vocal?!! Hm, great guitar playing, but the vocals..? Nothing special. And the song itself is a very traditional dated Hendrix rock song.

Norwayman said:

It's exactly the 'traditional dated Hendrix rock song' vibe with the historically-based lyric that makes the song a nominee.

The Audacity of it all..my goodness.

Out of all the Grammys ever given out, anything given to U2 has been definitely well deserved. If you are not into rock, cool, but dont dismiss them because of your narrow tastes in music.
Joshua Tree and SOTT are both legendary albums, too different to compare.