Jump to content

Truth tea: Why Britney lost the Best New Artist Grammy to XTina in 2000.


Guest StrawberryKisses

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply
5 minutes ago, wholenewway said:

It was already floating around that Brit was lipping at this point. I honestly think that's why. Then she lipped right there at the grammys... sounds like they were pissed about that. 

She sang FTBOMBH live but she lipped BOMT cuz she danced.

So that's one more reason to cut her off?
As if Janet and Michael weren't already lipping by that point :sassybrit:

Link to comment

I don't want anyone to downvote me for saying this, but Christina's debut album is arguably better than Britney's. Better production, better lyrics, it doesn't sound as dated. Of course the highs on BOMT are better than the highs on Christina's debut, but comparing album tracks, songs like Love Will Find A Way and So Emotional >>>>>>>>> Soda Pop and E-Mail My Heart.

Also, Christina was more successful than Britney IN THE U.S. Christina had three number one singles and a top three single on her debut, while Britney only had one number one single and the rest definitely underperformed. Tho they only underperformed because Britney didn't release physical CD singles when they were crucial to a songs chart performance back then.

Link to comment

The Grammys just don't like people like Britney they want people like Xtina to win. That's why this year Beyoncé and Adele will win everything. Demi Lovato was nominated for Confident (she kinda reminds me of Xtina) and Selena Gomez's Revival wasn't even nominated and it was way more successful and better (her tour and album sold more) the Grammys are rigged for specific artists and Britney isn't one of those artists:yaknow:

Link to comment

I can't @ ppl try to come up with excuses for the grammys.tumblr_oiissqDtud1vj3cd9o1_500.jpg

Like it's the only thing to look at a nominee for a Best New Artist.
(I would understand if X won Best Album over Britney more tbh (although Xtina had album fillers since even her debut))

But yea..lets pretend that success,charts,touring,performances,impact,selling don't matter.Sure :sofedup:

 

Edit: u know what..maybe she really did deserve it..although she only wins in voice and maybe critics (on her album/singles).

Link to comment

I think Christina's people just rubbed elbows with the right people at the time, is what got her the award, tbh. Also, I believe Britney's image was the primary focus of her career (her magazine covers, videos, etc.) more so than her actual talent and performance abilities during that time. At the end of the day, though, I feel like Britney deserved that award more as it is called "best new artist," and when you look at both of the artists careers at the time (even today), Britney's was far more successful than Christina's and Christina wouldn't have had the success she had if she wasn't rivaling Britney. 

Link to comment
15 hours ago, Soni said:

....

Britney had better sales and charts in everything...albums (everyone knows that so no need for providing proof)
//Xtinas debut album had average sales for 1999 (While Britney and Backstreet Boys were selling over 20mil)//

+ "Baby one more Time" sold more in the US than Christina did worldwide.

 

and while Brit didn't have much of a good charting in the US, she had more global singles..

:truthtea:

Britney was the IT girl.
There were so many copies of her (Mandy,Jessica (and even Xtina tbh)).
There were even ANTI-Britneys (P!nk and Avril).

So the impact is clearly a Britney win here yet AGAIN. :drinky:

------------

 

The "Baby One More Time Tour" grossed almost 3 times as much as Christina's debut tour (with less shows).:zoomzoom:

Christina Aguilera in Concert did 13,500,000 Dollars.
 

x
(Britney was/is always bigger in touring.Xtina even needed Justin (or they both needed one another tbh) to go on tour.)
:lollistare:
----
 
I agree about the thing that Xtina worked with people with closer relations to the Grammys and stuff (although I am pretty sure artists who worked with foreigners, won too)...
I don't know about the "deep" lyrics..if this is the only reason for winning then.. :ehum:
oh! lets not forget +the deep voice.. or something
it will be really dumb if they chose the winner just based on those things too..
 
Just accept it...the Grammys aren't anything different from the other awards...there IS politics and you probably can PAY for it! (Kanye even said that Bey said she will perform if she wins a certain category) :yeahsure:
Like Beyonce having more wins than Mariah,Whitney and Janet combined?
like...Bey is great and all but I don't think she should have more grammys then them combined.(that is why only bey fans defend the grammys tbh)
 
 
 
idk...that's my opinion:mariahstare:

Ia with almost everything but CA sold around 17m ww (bomt sold like 14m in usa alone) and even in 99, it was considered big. Of course Britney was the prom queen, but nsync debut sold 10m, jessicas 3m and mandys 1m, so it was big although it wasnt as big as Britney.

Britney didnt Win the grammys bc grammys hated her since the beggining. They probably thought Christina deserved bc of her Voice, but the funny is... If the voice counts the most, why Christina and Mariah has less than JT and Taylor? Lol why Rihanna has more than lady Gaga? Why Beyoncé has more than Adele? They are biased af :trash:

 

Link to comment
12 hours ago, BraveNewSeth said:

I don't want anyone to downvote me for saying this, but Christina's debut album is arguably better than Britney's. Better production, better lyrics, it doesn't sound as dated. Of course the highs on BOMT are better than the highs on Christina's debut, but comparing album tracks, songs like Love Will Find A Way and So Emotional >>>>>>>>> Soda Pop and E-Mail My Heart.

Also, Christina was more successful than Britney IN THE U.S. Christina had three number one singles and a top three single on her debut, while Britney only had one number one single and the rest definitely underperformed. Tho they only underperformed because Britney didn't release physical CD singles when they were crucial to a songs chart performance back then.

Ia about the album but Britney was more succesful in the usa, always has been. BOMT sold 14m copies there, CA sold a lil more than 8m, so BOMT sold almost the double. Christina was better at the singles, but Britney sold more albums and i think thats more importante lol also she was more of a mania and way more known. She was like the prom queen and Christina was next. On the awards, magazines, tv shows, everything, Britney was bigger.

Link to comment
14 hours ago, BOBIBCFBG said:

Max Martin wasnt unknown in the US he was just known as a pop producer for BSB, NSync and Robyn. I do think you're right on a few things - Christina's album was a little more mature and Britney's was more just fun. Their albums are still like that (Britney's are way better).

I do think it came down to voices though and as annoying as Christina's screaming is, she's definitely the stronger voice. Plus she sings live.

CA sold more than BOMT? 

CA was more mature and its better but we have to keep in mind that Britney recorded the album when she was 15-16 years old. The album was released when she just turned 17 years old.

CA was recorded when Christina was 17-18 years old and it was released months before her 19th bday so it makes a difference that  GIAB was released when she was 2 years older than Britney was in BOMT.

Britney was even Younger when she released oops than xtina was when CA was released.

Link to comment
10 hours ago, Arya said:

Ia about the album but Britney was more succesful in the usa, always has been. BOMT sold 14m copies there, CA sold a lil more than 8m, so BOMT sold almost the double. Christina was better at the singles, but Britney sold more albums and i think thats more importante lol also she was more of a mania and way more known. She was like the prom queen and Christina was next. On the awards, magazines, tv shows, everything, Britney was bigger.

Yeah, that's pretty true. And Christina's debut was her only era where she had back to back successful singles. A lot of them flopped during her other eras lol. I also agree with what the OP said about her voice. A lot of people think Christina is more talented than Britney because her voice is "louder", which is bullshit. Christina may technically have the better voice, but Britney has the perfect pop voice. Light, airy and feminine.

Link to comment
35 minutes ago, BraveNewSeth said:

Yeah, that's pretty true. And Christina's debut was her only era where she had back to back successful singles. A lot of them flopped during her other eras lol. I also agree with what the OP said about her voice. A lot of people think Christina is more talented than Britney because her voice is "louder", which is bullshit. Christina may technically have the better voice, but Britney has the perfect pop voice. Light, airy and feminine.

I really like christina's work and of course she isnt a flop like a lot of people here want to say. She was very successful for 12 years until 2010, but Britneys success was bigger, she was the one to beat.

I also feel radios only supported her on her debut era. She was one of the hottest acts during her stripped era and only beautiful was a top ten in the US. Its like Britney during her prime having a lot of hits that peaked only at #9, #10 or top 20 or 30.

I like christina's Voice but sometimes i feel like she doesnt know how to use it. Her tecnique was better during back to basics, but now sometimes its like shes all over the place. 

I like britneys Voice and i wish shed Sing more like this: 

 

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

We noticed you're using an ad blocker  :ehum_britney_um_unsure_confused_what:

Thanks for visiting Exhale! Your support is greatly appreciated 💜  

Exhale survives through advertising revenue. Please, disable your ad block extension to help us and continue browsing Exhale. 🙏

I've disabled ad block