It's been a few weeks since the 2009 Grammy winners were announced during the live ceremony and I still have beef over the results, particularly the Album of the Year category. Once again, the old codgers that make up the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences decided that a past-his-prime Robert Plant put out the best album of 2008 in a collaboration with Alison Krauss titled Raising Sand. This folk rock gem apparently is a more accomplished album than Radiohead's In Rainbows, Coldplay's Viva La Vida or Death and All His Friends (my pick), or even Lil' Wayne's Tha Carter III.
I challenge any of my readers to download Viva La Vida and Raising Sand. Play both albums back-to-back, listen to all the tracks and I am pretty sure the vast majority of you would agree that Viva La Vida is the more inventive and original piece of work. While the Grammy's don't really mean much in the grand scheme of things, I really wanted Coldplay to be acknowledged for what I consider to be the best album of the millennium thus-far (oh it's true). Unfortunately the weird Album of the Year Grammy trend continues as evidenced by these terrible selections from over the past decade (also listed are the more-deserving albums that the winner beat out).
2008 - Herbie Hancock - River: The Joni Letters (Kanye West, Amy Winehouse, Foo Fighters)
2006 - Ray Charles - Genius Loves Company (Kanye again, Alicia Keys, Green Day - American Idiot)
2002 - Oh Brother, Where Art Thou Soundtrack (Outkast, U2)
2001 (The WORST one) - Steely Dan - Two Against Nature (Eminem, Radiohead, Beck)
C'mon. Steely fucking Dan produced a better album than the Marshall Mathers LP? I think not. After all of the disastrous choices above, I am becoming convinced that the Grammy Awards really have no merit when it comes to honoring quality music. Perhaps T-Bone Burnett (producer of Raising Sand and Oh Brother) should become the president of the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences. He'd be a shoe-in.