I'm not a huge Mercury fan; albums are nearly all shit apart from hit compilations and intelligent theme collections (like great classical work). They were "invented" by labels to screw huge profits out of one hit wonders and normally feature one decent track and a dozen pieces of self indulgent lazy shit.

The Mercury concept is dominated by pretentious turds who decide if something is worthy; a personal judgement based on the level of up anus.

Even the great Boss had albums with several terrific tracks but his finest collection remains his Greatest Hits.

Some of what you say is true, but the Mercury’s didn’t invent the album, all they are doing is giving a prize to the best album as chosen by a bunch of judges.

For all its faults, (and there are many), it does result in a TV show and associated publicity, and usually significant album sales. Which, like a Record of the Year show, is ultimately a good thing.

So that’s the Mercury debate started. I’m going to leave the merits of albums for another day, albeit to say we wouldn’t have a record industry without them!

Good point Dixie - indeed the Mercurys didn't invent the album - but I think they should change it from "albums" to "collections" and become far less snooty about contenders. And far less influenced by the major players. Remember Gomez?

Last night's show was one where I experienced a new artist who I really like, (who hadn't registered with me beforehand, though I'd had a listen to the album earlier this year). Anna Calvi was, in my opinion, the best performer of the night, and at this moment I am listening to her album on Spotify as a result of last night. Katy B was rather good too.