Mercury Music Awards 2006 nominees

[Liam]

Arctic Monkeys - Whatever People Say I Am, That's What I'm Not

Isobel Campbell & Mark Lanegan - Ballad Of The Broken Seas

Editors - The Back Room

Guillemots - Through The Windowpane

Richard Hawley - Coles Corner

Hot Chip - The Warning

Muse - Black Holes And Revelations

Zoe Rahman - Melting Pot

Lou Rhodes - Beloved One

Scritti Politti - White Bread, Black Beer

Sway - This Is My Demo

Thom Yorke - The Eraser

For those who may be interested.

[John Stones' Paint Trophy]

Arctic Monkeys and Thom Yorke are the outstanding favourites according to the bookies and I'm inclined to agree with them.

[YI]

Arctic Monkey's should win. Best album out of the lot (Well what I've heard anyway). But if they do, I sense some sort of backlash, but technically, it's my favourite album, and is really, really good. They deserve it.

Edited July 21, 2006 by BillyGunnPinchedMyBum

[Liam]

Arctic Monkeys and Thom Yorke are the outstanding favourites according to the bookies and I'm inclined to agree with them.

Mercury generally don't like to give it to the "obvious" choices, so I wouldn't be surprised if it didn't go to either of them.

[John Stones' Paint Trophy]

True but last year there was plenty artists that you could have given it to but this year, the field seems a bit worse than last year (from what I've heard). Last year, there was about 6 albums that you deserved it while this year, it's only really AM and Yorke who could, with Editors being the outside chance.

Then again, I haven't heard as many albums off the list as I had last year so there could be something truly groundbreaking in it.

[Steeb]

Guillemots deserve it, without a doubt. One of the most pleasant and moving albums I've ever heard, with some real interesting bits too.

Editors wouldn't find me complaining either though.

[Skummy]

Ugh...that's the worst list of Mercury nominees in a while. The point is that it's supposed to go to someone that isn't already established, so I'd rather it didn't go to Thom Yorke or Arctic Monkeys. It's meant to go to a band that's breaking new ground, or are at least interesting, so I'd rather it didn't go to Editors either.

I'd like to see it go to Richard Hawley, ideally, as Cole's Corner is the best thing he's ever done as a solo artist, in my opinion.

My second choice would be the Guillemots, although I wouldn't be complaining if Campbell and Lanegan get it.

[Lord Nibbler]

Ugh...that's the worst list of Mercury nominees in a while. The point is that it's supposed to go to someone that isn't already established, so I'd rather it didn't go to Thom Yorke or Arctic Monkeys. It's meant to go to a band that's breaking new ground, or are at least interesting, so I'd rather it didn't go to Editors either.

[Steeb]

Arctic Monkeys won anyway.

I disliked the fact that one of the judges, when interviewed, stated that it was supposed to be judged entirely on the music contained on the album, then seconds later went on to say one of the factors was that '2006 will be remembered as the year of Arctic Monkeys', so it was evidently Album of the Year. Just irked me.

[Skummy]

Ugh. I hate to sound elitist, but Arctic Monkeys were better before they brought out an album.

I never knew Isobel Campbell and Mark Lanegan had worked together before, though. I'm assuming it's quite twee-pop (although I'd love to hear them duetting on some real bar-room booze-soaked ballads, a la early Tom Waits), but is it any good? It sounds incredible. Has anyone here heard it?