[paulyyyozd]

definitely not.
Grammys are much more subjecitve, in Olympics you can cleary see who deserves it because he/she/they won.

[LDYGG]

Originally posted by SupremeGoddess

No. You can buy grammys now

Pretty much this.

[QueenBLadyG]

Originally posted by MohammadMonster

grammys to artists is like gold medals to athletes

This. I don't get where everyone is taking this a different way and running with it. I also love how everyone is trying to undermine the Grammy award and what it means. They aren't bought. Some may appear undeserving but those on the academy with the opportunity to vote do and their votes are tallied and the results are what they are. They will remain the top award in the music industry. Wished and yearned for by those unable to win one.

[Sunderland 4ever]

Talking about the music industry, maybe, but Grammys are subjective and you can win one by help of thousands of producers. On an olympic game, it's all about how good your performance is. Sure, you have trainers, but it's all about how well YOU perform on the olympic games.

Originally posted by QueenBLadyG

I think the OP means is winning a Grammy, since it's the highest honor in the music industry, is equivalent to an athlete going to the Olympics and winning a Gold Medal which is the highest honor an athlete can get.

It's good to add that not necessarily the ones who win the Grammy are the best singers, and not all of the best singers think a Grammy is the highest peak of recognition of their voice because they don't need it; it's mainly subjective.

[Cobrastyle.]

No one gives a **** about Grammys, it's the same as every award.

[QueenBLadyG]

Originally posted by Sunderland 4ever

Talking about the music industry, maybe, but Grammys are subjective and you can win one by help of thousands of producers. On an olympic game, it's all about how good your performance is. Sure, you have trainers, but it's all about how well YOU perform on the olympic games.



It's good to add that not necessarily the ones who win the Grammy are the best singers, and not all of the best singers think a Grammy is the highest peak of recognition of their voice because they don't need it; it's mainly subjective.

Whether they think it or not doesn't matter. They will always be introduced as Grammy Award Winning Enter Name Here. Just as with actors are introduced Academy Award Winner Enter Name Here, or an athlete who wins at the Olympics will always be introduced as Olympic Gold Winner or Gold Winning Olympian. The person who gets the award may not feel it defines them or is their peak but the world says different.

And even Olympians get screwed out of medals. There were plenty of examples of a dive team or a gymnastics team deserving higher scores but they didn't get them. There are plenty of unfair losers and winners there also.

[Gabriel_Spears]

Originally posted by jqnetto

No.

Music is subjective, sport are not.

THIS

[Sunderland 4ever]

Originally posted by jqnetto

No.

Music is subjective, sport are not.

How did I miss this? I absolutely agree. Because of this, I don't think this can be possibly compared. If you compare Grammys, compare it with another judge-and/or-audience-based award.

[Sunderland 4ever]

Originally posted by QueenBLadyG

And even Olympians get screwed out of medals. There were plenty of examples of a dive team or a gymnastics team deserving higher scores but they didn't get them. There are plenty of unfair losers and winners there also.

Since winners in those Olympic Sports Disciplines cannot be defined by the fastest or the strongest, they are condemned to be defined by humans, who can commit mistakes.

[Glam]

If Grammys were a worldwide award then they would be.

[Beautiful Sinner]

Originally posted by jqnetto

No.

Music is subjective, sport are not.

This.

[IWasHere]

Originally posted by paulyyyozd

definitely not.
Grammys are much more subjecitve, in Olympics you can cleary see who deserves it because he/she/they won.

Exactly.

[brIt-()nstar]

There are reasons a lot of artists who lost at the grammy never cried as much as the guys who lost at the olympics. You just can't compare it.

[Jennifer]

No

[Tropez]

No the Olympic actually use numbers and obvious choices to win. It's less biased and more us or no. The Grammys are very biased, sales based, can be bought, and everyone has a different taste of what's good and bad.

[Cas]

Of course not.

[castle13]

Originally posted by QueenBLadyG

This. I don't get where everyone is taking this a different way and running with it. I also love how everyone is trying to undermine the Grammy award and what it means. They aren't bought. Some may appear undeserving but those on the academy with the opportunity to vote do and their votes are tallied and the results are what they are. They will remain the top award in the music industry. Wished and yearned for by those unable to win one.

.

[Enne Driver.]

Grammy awards are irrilevant

[Harajuku]

Nope

[Energy]

No, not at all.